jump to last post 1-50 of 65 discussions (270 posts)

A Hubbers SEO/SEM Code of Ethics

  1. Pcunix profile image89
    Pcunixposted 6 years ago

    I'd like to suggest that we create such a thing.

    You can Google "SEO ethics" and "SEM ethics" to find suggestions of the types of things it might say. 

    I found a few links that might get it started.

    http://www.pronetadvertising.com/articl … f-seo.html
    www.iprospect.com/premiumPDFs/ethics_white_paper.pdf
    http://www.bruceclay.com/web_ethics.htm

    I've seen similar things done at other sites.  If you've agreed to follow the code, you display some sort of badge or sometimes just a link to the code.

    Obviously there are folks here who would never agree with any such thing, and others who might agree but not adhere to the code in practice, but I think it could be worth doing just the same.

    Let me stress that this should be entirely VOLUNTARY. No one would be forced to agree with the code, though personally I can't see why anyone who would not should get any respect from anyone else.

    But nevertheless, voluntary.

    1. lrohner profile image84
      lrohnerposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Are you for real?

    2. relache profile image88
      relacheposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Well, you've done nothing here to earn my respect...

      1. Mark Knowles profile image59
        Mark Knowlesposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Quite the opposite as far as I am concerned.

      2. Anna Marie Bowman profile image91
        Anna Marie Bowmanposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        I'm with relache

    3. EmpressFelicity profile image84
      EmpressFelicityposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Ethical behaviour doesn't (or shouldn't) need a badge.  And having such a badge would hardly affect people's willingness (or otherwise) to click on the ads in my hubs.   Most people browsing the Internet couldn't give a monkeys about SEO, PPC, LSI, CTR etc., assuming they even know what these TLAs mean.  (TLA = Three Letter Acronym.)




      Oh Gawd. 

      You occasionally make some good points, and then you spoil it either by personalising everything, or making lame attempts at emotional blackmail. Like this one.

      1. Pcunix profile image89
        Pcunixposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        You can call it emotional blackmail if you want, but the very real fact is that I do NOT have any respect for unethical practices.

        If you search for the terms I suggested, you'll see that I am hardly alone in that regard.

        I really do not understand the anger here.  Honestly, it makes me feel like not even waiting to see if there is any support.  There seem to be far too many spammers here and perhaps I should start packing my bags now.

        I have a dental appointment now.  I'm going to think about that while there.

      2. LSKing profile image86
        LSKingposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        " give a monkeys.... " that made me laugh....

    4. Jayne Lancer profile image90
      Jayne Lancerposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Not only do I see absolutely no point to this, it's priggish to say the very least.

    5. Sufidreamer profile image79
      Sufidreamerposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      I had a look at the links you provided - they have very little to do with promoting an ethical code and everything to do with making money. They are thinly disguised sales pitches using ethics as a selling point to snare the unwary; using such methods to prey on the good intentions of others seems to be a far more insidious practice than the backlink building you detest so much.

      Ethics is always a grey area - there is rarely such a concept as black and white in such matters, as humanity has found over the millenia. Hubpages boasts many members, each with their own specific agenda, and somebody writing for fun may well have a completely different ethical outlook to someone relying upon writing as an income.

      I can imagine that marketers have their own set of ethical guidelines, too, and trying to force everything into a 'one-size-fits-all' code seems doomed to failure. There is no algorithm that can assess the quality and merit of content, or pick up the subtle variations that make the difference between good writing and sublime writing so, until then, the idea of 'cream rising to the top' is an over-idealistic aim.

      My profession is in a very competitive niche and I have to create some backlinks and signposts pointing towards my site or it will never be found by potential clients. This is my reality, and if that means that I am unethical, by your simplistic definition, or I lose your respect, then so be it. I am sure that I can live with the burden of abject shame, with no self-flagellation, guilt, or anguish involved. smile

      I worked in retail for many years and, as lrohner has mentioned on other threads, the practices used in real-world business make backlinking look like child's play. Personally, I see creating backlinks and posts pointing back towards my site in the same way that I see handing out business cards and fliers to promote a shop - it is something that you have to do if you want to compete and put food on the table.

      Business is a hard world - you have to compete or you starve. I choose not to starve wink

    6. 0
      Website Examinerposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      No thanks!

  2. livewithrichard profile image85
    livewithrichardposted 6 years ago

    I'll be the first.  I think it's a garbage idea. We are a writing community here and not every hubber is here to earn money. We write and build our own reputations, followers, admirers, and enemies and we do not need some badge from the almighty Google to unite us.

    We are who we are. We write what we want to write, so long as it is within the TOS of Hubpages.  A code of ethics is a joke.

    Volunteer or risk losing the respect of Pcunix.....lol now that's funny too.

    If you don't like the way things are here at Hubpages, then take your older than Google you know what and move on to Squidoo.

    Vote NO from me.

  3. Pcunix profile image89
    Pcunixposted 6 years ago

    I expected those first two responses.

    There are people here who don't believe in ethics.  That's fine - as I said, this would be voluntary.

    Why are they so afraid of this?  Is it because they think that a majority of people WOULD agree to ethical conduct and they, as a unpersuaded minority, would look bad?

    1. lrohner profile image84
      lrohnerposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Seriously, you should scoot on over to the religion forum to meet your long-lost relatives. Read my post again. I did not say I was afraid of it, nor did I say I was against it or even that I wouldn't agree with it. But where you come off slamming anyone and telling them they don't "deserve respect" because they don't jump when you beckon is truly disgusting.

  4. waynet profile image45
    waynetposted 6 years ago

    LOL....You're obsessed PC!

  5. Uzdawi profile image32
    Uzdawiposted 6 years ago

    Is this a joke?

  6. Pcunix profile image89
    Pcunixposted 6 years ago

    It remains my opinion that anyone who will not act ethically in this matter deserves no respect.

    I don't NEED your respect, but really don't understand your obvious anger.  I suggested that WE, the hubbers and HP, the owners, develop a code of ethics. I might think that the finished product is too weak, and someone else might think it too restrictive.  This has nothing to do with me forcing my opinions on you.

    Quite surprising that the reactions are so angry.  Do I detect some guilt here?  I'm quite surprised at you, honestly, because I always thought you didn't bother with Google gaming.

    Also - your post was not here when I asked the question about "why".  Obviously you wewre not being referenced - unless one of those name is a sock puppet of yours.

    1. Anna Marie Bowman profile image91
      Anna Marie Bowmanposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      No anger here, and from everything I have read about HubPages rules as well as rules laid out by Google, I am following every guideline, and am conducting myself very ethically.  I just don't feel I need to broadcast that.  It's like someone standing up in front of a crowd talking about how ethical they are.  Seems rather boasting.  "Look at me!!  I am ethical!!"

  7. Cagsil profile image83
    Cagsilposted 6 years ago

    I saw this post earlier, when livewithrichard responded. At the time, I found it wasn't worthy of a response.

    However, since more people have responded, I'll have to continue laughing.

    *on a side note- it was interesting to see* smile

  8. Pcunix profile image89
    Pcunixposted 6 years ago

    Ok.

    I'll give it a week.

    If I see no support for the idea, I'll be removing all my posts from HP and deactivating my account because I do not want to be part of a site where people are opposed to even a VOLUNTARY, community created  code of ethics.

    I'm sure that will delight some of you.  I hope you unethical fans turn out to be the minority.

    1. Mark Knowles profile image59
      Mark Knowlesposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      ciao

    2. waynet profile image45
      waynetposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      So, it's your way or the highway.

      1. Pcunix profile image89
        Pcunixposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Nope.

        But if everyone here is unwilling to even have voluntary, community developed code of ethics, I don't want MY name associated with the site.

        But who says it will turn out that way?  Not everyone here is unethical.

        1. Mark Knowles profile image59
          Mark Knowlesposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          ciao

          1. Pcunix profile image89
            Pcunixposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            So you think everyone is unethical?  Is that your final answer?

            1. Mark Knowles profile image59
              Mark Knowlesposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              ciao

    3. EmpressFelicity profile image84
      EmpressFelicityposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      People aren't necessarily opposed to the ethics per se, they're just opposed to your manner of recommending them, and to wearing some sort of prefect's badge to advertise their allegiance.  Don't we have enough prefect's badges on this site already?

      1. Pcunix profile image89
        Pcunixposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        I said it would be a community effort and that it could be a link or a badge.  As it would be voluntary, anyone could ignore it outright.  How is that anything but positive?

        I'm not trying to force my ideas down anyones throats.  I simply believe that a voluntary, community created and HP blessed code of ethics would add to the value of the site.

        1. EmpressFelicity profile image84
          EmpressFelicityposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          I don't think it would make an awful lot of difference.  The biggest detraction to the value of this site is the presence of oceans and oceans of spam hubs.  I'm willing to bet that the people who created these spam hubs probably aren't even reading this thread, let alone thinking of signing up to your voluntary code.

          1. Pcunix profile image89
            Pcunixposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            It makes a difference to some who might be considering signing up.  Some people would like the idea of being associated with other ethical hubbers. 

            It makes a difference to me - I am going to leave if I don't see any support at all.

            1. livewithrichard profile image85
              livewithrichardposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              Have you heard the term ethical dilemma?  There are two contrasting views of what is right and wrong.  You seem to be of the opinion that whatever Google thinks is right and what most affiliate marketers think is wrong.

              News flash --- Google may be the biggest player in the game but they're not the only player in the game and most successful affiliate marketers know this.  Most of us that are savvy in the game can lose our Adsense accounts today and still thrive without the assistance of almighty Google. Why? Because just like Google is a business, we are a business.  Just as Google’s main concern is NOT to provide the best most relevant content BUT to provide the highest rate of return to its SHAREHOLDERS, it is OUR interest as affiliate marketers to assure OUR content provides the highest rate of return to US.

              Can you provide us with a definitive explanation of ethics?  I doubt it since there are at least 9 different theories as to what ethics means.  There is no “right and wrong” set of rules that can be used as a cookie cutter for every situation.

              I and many others here write to earn money which contributes to our overall income and we’re going to promote our content until our content is no longer providing a valued rate of return.  Since Hubpages is getting 40% of that rate of return our methods are in their best interests.

              Hubpages has stated on several occasions that they have a system in place to detect spammy link building and they will contact individuals on a case by case situation.  If they don’t like Misha’s methods then why are they still promoting it on their blog?  If they don’t approve of Sunforge’s methods, why have they not removed his 60day challenge threads?
                 
              We’re an international community here and many of us have contributed much more than a measly 4 months to this site.  We have a flagging system and a rewards system and a support system here so as Mark eloquently stated,

              ciao

              1. Pcunix profile image89
                Pcunixposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                Funny how other places seem to be able to develop a code of ethics.

                Really funny how people are so vehemently against the idea.

                It says something about you, doesn't it?

                Oh well..

                1. livewithrichard profile image85
                  livewithrichardposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  Yes it says my ethics are determined based on my own internal values, and not what anyone else thinks. 

                  Since you want to hang on every word Corporate Google has to say, what does that say about your ethics?

                  1. Pcunix profile image89
                    Pcunixposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                    Have you even bothered to look at the links I gave or searched for the keywords I suggested?

              2. TNB profile image60
                TNBposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                Firstly, this is the most cynical and most arrogant reply I've seen on HP.

                Don't talk to us about what is right and what is wrong, because you clearly don't know it. It's not a question of whose opinion it is. Right and wrong exist and they are constant. The pathetic relativism that you've displayed is a thing of the past as more and more people are realizing that there IS such a thing as ethics in an absolute sense.

                I'm sorry, but I'm totally disgusted by your cynical approach to businesses. It is clear that you are willing to sacrifice fair play at any given moment when it comes to making some petty cash.

                Moreover, if you know what marketing is about then you know why HP do what they do with respect to promoting hubbers' earnings on their blog.

                You know what pissed me off completely? Mentioning that PCUnix has been here for "only" four months. As if it mattered anything. As if you were any better, because you've been here longer. Another clue that you have no idea of ethics at all. BTW, PCUnix published as many hubs in 4 months as you did in 17 months.

                1. livewithrichard profile image85
                  livewithrichardposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  Firstly, it doesn't concern me in the slightest that I "pissed you off."

                  My cynical approach to business as you put it is honesty. My readers know I'm here to earn money. I'm an affiliate marketer that earns way more than "petty cash." I provide quality content and active participation in this community which is why my hubber score has never been below the 90's since my first week here.

                  My reference to his 4 months had nothing to do with his output here at HP, it had every thing to do with his sense of community. He's been nothing but confrontational on nearly every thread I've seen him on.  His way is better period.

                  1. Pcunix profile image89
                    Pcunixposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                    How amusing that you feel so threatened by my call for a COMMUNITY CREATED, VOLUNTARY code of ethics.

                    How is that "my way"?

                  2. TNB profile image60
                    TNBposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                    So basically you're hammering the idea, because you don't like the guy?

                    Or this idea of a code of conduct (or really of anything) just made you (a liberal) like the guy even less?

                    Nevermind. I feel inclined to oppose anybody who judges people based on the amount of time they've spent on hp.

    4. TerryGl profile image61
      TerryGlposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      I have come across a few of your posts here on the forum and I must admit, not even knowing you, that I did take a dislike.

      Maybe now you will realise that it is the quiet achievers around here that demand respect and don't ask for it.

      You have lost me now. If you resort to blackmail of taking your bat and ball and going home then all I can say is, don't slam the door on your way out. I am not that sure you were really liked that much anyway.

      As to be unethical, you come across as one hell of a condescending so and so I have ever had the displeasure to read about.

      Pc Unik I am not one of your fans. You might want to edit your profile where you state you have made many friends here. What a laugh!!

  9. Anna Marie Bowman profile image91
    Anna Marie Bowmanposted 6 years ago

    Childishness at it's best! Either do what I want, or I'm taking my toys and going home.  Reminds me of Cartman on South Park.."Screw you guys, I'm going home." LOL

  10. Shadesbreath profile image91
    Shadesbreathposted 6 years ago

    PC, you know I'm with you on the belief that legitimate content should be raised to the top by the nature of it's being quality writing created with the reader first and foremost in the writer's mind.  As a writer who tries to create art, I am of the belief writing is meant to ennoble us, not reduce us.  You and I agree on that.  Your devotion to integrity is admirable and I support you in that (even if I don't think this code of ethics is the way).  Your idealistic Plato side needs your Aristotle side to step in and keep your feet on the ground, though.  Don't leave, dude.

    1. Misha profile image74
      Mishaposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      I am only wondering John where exactly did you find a devotion to integrity? What integrity exactly? In following monster corporation's word? I thought you were sort of against corporate greed wink

      1. Shadesbreath profile image91
        Shadesbreathposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        I'm speaking to what I think PC's overarching goal is, that being to see articles rise on their own merit in a system that is genuinely designed to facilitate that.  The idealist in him is running amok of pragmatism with this idea is all.  I'm all for the elimination of all greed, but, in the meantime...

        [edit] It's like the quote at the beginning of the movie Riddick: Sometimes the best way of fighting evil is with another kind of evil.  Some of my best friends are that second kind of evil.  big_smile

  11. frogdropping profile image83
    frogdroppingposted 6 years ago

    Unfortunately the only way you're going to achieve what you're looking for is by way of having your own sites and never straying from them. HP is a business. I'm not suggesting that they lack a moral ethic - rather that they should and do possess a sound business ethic. Otherwise we wouldn't be here in the first place.

    And I don't know if it's been said but - relating to your own high standards, you really should consider continuing with affiliate programs that don't allow you full control. The very thing you find so deplorable here, around the web - will appear on articles you publish, wherever you allow affiliate advertising.

    If you're a committed vegetarian ... you don't wear leather.

  12. waynet profile image45
    waynetposted 6 years ago

    A code of ethics seems ridiculous really and all a site needs is it's own terms of service and that's it! Google may be the top search engine now, but being up the big G's botty isn't good for our own earning potential.

    Ciao!

    1. EmpressFelicity profile image84
      EmpressFelicityposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      I just couldn't resist...

      http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_iKcZ3qcCmyo/SE3TVx2P--I/AAAAAAAAH10/aT9HhUJ1duU/s400/Google_Calendar_head_ass.jpg

      1. Misha profile image74
        Mishaposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        It's a blasphemy!!!!! yikes

      2. waynet profile image45
        waynetposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        ROFLMAO lol

  13. Pcunix profile image89
    Pcunixposted 6 years ago

    The general maturity level seems very low..

    No ethics, immature..  Do I really want to be associated with the likes of you?

    I know there are ethical people here.  It seems like they are afraid to speak up ir they just don't care.

    Ok. I will give it a little time yet.

    1. Daniel Carter profile image89
      Daniel Carterposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Not afraid to speak up, but not sure it's going to be more than wasted keystrokes.

      PC, Hubpages assumes we ARE ethical when we sign up because we agree to their terms and conditions, and THEY do all they can to keep their rating in Google in good, ethical compliance.

      With all due respect, you're only adding redundancy to the Department of Redundancy Department.

      It's not your site to dictate and define ethics. Ethics are implied here at HP, as established by HP, and when people violate those implied ethics, HP does the dirty work, not us.

      1. livewithrichard profile image85
        livewithrichardposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Couldn't agree more!

      2. Pcunix profile image89
        Pcunixposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        You did not bother to read this thread, did you?

        No, it is not my place and I never said that it should be.

        I asked HP if they are in favor of ethical SEO, they answered that they are and are in the process of updating the  Learning Center pages.

        1. Daniel Carter profile image89
          Daniel Carterposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          If they are doing that, then why are you doing it for them? You did not bother to read my post, did you?

          1. Pcunix profile image89
            Pcunixposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            Where did I say that I wanted to define ethical SEO?  Go READ.

  14. Misha profile image74
    Mishaposted 6 years ago

    LOL We got another brave sockpuppet lol

    1. TNB profile image60
      TNBposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Well, as you can see, I created this account 4 days ago when this thread was not around yet.

      1. Pcunix profile image89
        Pcunixposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        I do not know who you are, but you give ne hope, at lest. I hope that there are more.

  15. lrohner profile image84
    lrohnerposted 6 years ago

    PCUnix--You had a better chance of having a reasonable, intelligent discussion about the pros and cons of SEO on this thread and the last if you had approached it in a civil, open-minded manner.

    I do believe that the folks that engage in "black hat" SEO at HP are in the minority. But that's not good enough for you. You want the rest of us to prove to you that we're not, otherwise we don't "deserve respect." I hate to break this to you, but when you approach a Type A, post-menopausal, Irish-Catholic female with that kind of nonsense, the fur is going to fly.

    1. EmpressFelicity profile image84
      EmpressFelicityposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      It tends to have the same effect on pre-menopausal Viking-descended females of vaguely Protestant origin too lol

      1. lrohner profile image84
        lrohnerposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        lol lol lol

    2. Pcunix profile image89
      Pcunixposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      What exactly is uncivil about suggesting a voluntary, community developed code of ethics?

      1. lrohner profile image84
        lrohnerposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        PC, I don't believe you are a stupid man, so don't act it. It doesn't become you. Go and reread what you wrote on your OP.

  16. Rochelle Frank profile image89
    Rochelle Frankposted 6 years ago

    I think it is a very fine idea to have a personal code of ethics. The thing is-- it is personal.. If people sign up, even voluntarily, they are making it public rather than personal.

    It's like visiting a church where the preacher asks people to voluntarily stand up if they honestly love the Lord. Any who do not will be looked down upon, literally and figuratively. Those who are unsure-- but are there to learn, may stand up under peer pressure, but they are being dishonest.

    1. Pcunix profile image89
      Pcunixposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      No. Their own code might be more strict. 

      Moreover, the tone of this site right now is quite unethical - the ones with no ethics pile on anyone and everyone who speaks in favor of ethics.

      That is peer pressure - I think a site blessed code of ethics  would help counter that.

      Obviously that what these nay-sayers fear.

    2. Marisa Wright profile image92
      Marisa Wrightposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      I agree with this.

      Pcunix, I suspect you think I belong to the "dark side" - but actually I have principles too.

      I tried joining a scheme where we all created micro-blogs to create links to each other's work - and yes, it made me "feel dirty", because they were content-free zones which added no value whatsoever other than the links.  I tried joining a link-building service which involved posting spun articles on each other's blogs - and yes, that made me feel dirty, too, because most members created junk blogs and posted junk articles. 

      But that's my personal opinion - actually it's not even an opinion, it's a gut reaction.  But it's my personal reaction and I'm not going to ram it down anyone else's throat, start calling people names for doing it, or display a badge to show I'm holier-than-thou.

      And I think you'll find the angry reactions are not a result of guilt - it's just a carry over from other threads where people were already angry. It happens.

      1. Jayne Lancer profile image90
        Jayne Lancerposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        My sentiments, too.

      2. Misha profile image74
        Mishaposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        What goes around, comes around. This is the source of anger on all threads this troll participates in, Marisa. smile

        1. Pcunix profile image89
          Pcunixposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          I'm not a troll, Misha, but you are someone who buys links and uses automated software to promote content that you buy from other people.

          I think it is disgusting that some here treat you as a hero. You most definitely are not.

          1. Haunty profile image84
            Hauntyposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            Maybe resourceful? In a very naughty way, of course.

            1. Pcunix profile image89
              Pcunixposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              If that's what you want to call it. That is against HP policy, though.  I assume he doesn't do that to his hubs here - or at least will not be now that HP has stated their intentions to look for such behavior.

              1. Haunty profile image84
                Hauntyposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                Hp has gone through a lot of changes since I first came here, all the time trying to become a more clean and transparent company. They might have something in store for us that we don't suspect.

                1. Pcunix profile image89
                  Pcunixposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  I certainly hope so. I would hate to quit and find that they boot the likes of Misha a month later.

                  1. frogdropping profile image83
                    frogdroppingposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                    *sighs*

                    This is all beginning to feel like a witch hunt. In your ideal world, all the Misha's lose their income. You're happy - it serves them right, they lack honor as business men. More unethical marketers removed. Great.

                    I receive some of my income from ads I disagree with. Can't say that I'm a backlinking demon, though I've been known to have the odd growth spurt. But I don't disable the ads that I find objectionable. Let's not sugar coat the pill - I lower and raise my ethical bar in direct relation to $ signs. I don't suppose my sliding ethical bar will doom me until the cows come home but I'm pretty certain I'm far removed from righteousness.   

                    The fact that you don't care what ads show up around your own articles isn't far removed from what you are denouncing. Whenever a reader clicks off-page on one of those ads, you are knowingly receiving money from a source that you deplore.

                    Either you are 100% behind what you stand up for or you're not. Boycott those ads. They represent all that you denigrate.

                    Like I said - a vegetarian has no business wearing leather.

            2. Misha profile image74
              Mishaposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              Hi Pacal smile

              I guess there is some ambiguity here - is Pclown a resourceful troll, or am I a resourceful internet marketer? Or may be both? wink

              1. Haunty profile image84
                Hauntyposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                I was referring to you as resourceful. All I know about Pcunix is that he likes to argue with everyone. Maybe that's why people were harsh to him from the start of this thread. I don't know. But they were harsh.

                1. Misha profile image74
                  Mishaposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  Thank you sir smile

                  As for this guy - take a look at his other post on different threads, and you will see that he actively provokes harshness. As I said - what goes around, comes around. smile

                  1. Pcunix profile image89
                    Pcunixposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                    Look at Mushas threads where he brags about buying content and links to promote the penny a word articles he buys.

                    Quite the hero.

                2. Jayne Lancer profile image90
                  Jayne Lancerposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  I rarely take time for the Forums, so I know nothing about Pcunix. But the very tone of his proposal got my shackles up.

  17. frogdropping profile image83
    frogdroppingposted 6 years ago

    I think that's the bit that trips you up in the eye's of others. It was a little unnecessary.

    It's about the same as saying ... this is my ball.

  18. livewithrichard profile image85
    livewithrichardposted 6 years ago

    More: he wants us to buy into this ethics as provided by Google who states that linking schemes are no good and have no place on their search engine. Then they sell advertising space to companies that sell backlinks... Seems real ethical to me.

    1. Pcunix profile image89
      Pcunixposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      None of the links I gave were to anything Google developed.  Why do you lie?  Is it necessary to lie to fight a simple suggestion like this?

      1. 60
        MyPostingIDposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        You keep insisting that people are "fighting" the idea.  You've been told multiple times by multiple people that they are not necessarily against the idea.  Many here (myself included) simply find it unnecessary.

        You've threatened multiple times in this thread to leave HubPages.  Given the fact that you are not happy with the environment, it might be best for you to do so.  It appears you may be happier running your own network of blogs/content.  I am being sincere (believe it or not).

        1. Pcunix profile image89
          Pcunixposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          I haven't threatened anything.   

          I've asked HP directly what their future intentions are with regard to unethical link building.  I realize it is impossible to police anything but the most extreme, but a strong statement of policy would be helpful.

          1. Jayne Lancer profile image90
            Jayne Lancerposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            'If I see no support for the idea, I'll be removing all my posts from HP and deactivating my account because I do not want to be part of a site where people are opposed to even a VOLUNTARY, community created  code of ethics.'

            These aren't your words?

            1. waynet profile image45
              waynetposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              Lol!

              1. Pcunix profile image89
                Pcunixposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                That's not a threat.  That's a statement of possibility dependent upon circumstance. 

                We'll see what HP has to say.  If they ignore me or tell me they have no interest in ethics, yes, I will be leaving.  I'm sure that will make you very happy.

                1. waynet profile image45
                  waynetposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  No...come back!

                2. Jayne Lancer profile image90
                  Jayne Lancerposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  I can well imagine many of us have an interest in ethics, but, as Marisa so rightly says, 'I'm not going to ram it down anyone else's throat, or display a badge to show I'm holier-than-thou.' I'm sure she's not in the minority here.

                  Why don't you stop upsetting yourself?

          2. 60
            MyPostingIDposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            QUOTE 1:

            I'll give it a week.

            If I see no support for the idea, I'll be removing all my posts from HP and deactivating my account because I do not want to be part of a site where people are opposed to even a VOLUNTARY, community created  code of ethics.


            QUOTE 2:

            Nope.

            But if everyone here is unwilling to even have voluntary, community developed code of ethics, I don't want MY name associated with the site.


            QUOTE 3:

            Honestly, it makes me feel like not even waiting to see if there is any support.  There seem to be far too many spammers here and perhaps I should start packing my bags now.



            QUOTE 4:

            It makes a difference to me - I am going to leave if I don't see any support at all.

      2. livewithrichard profile image85
        livewithrichardposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Why do say I lie? The course of your rant since you got on this backlinking thing is "Google doesn't want...," "Read what Google has to say about...," You may have not of mentioned it in this thread but this thread is a derivative of your continuing rant and aggression against any backlinking that is not achieved organically.  If you deny that this code of ethics idea arose from anything other than your perception of what is right or wrong for Google's sake then you sir are a liar.

        1. Pcunix profile image89
          Pcunixposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          As the links I gave and even the most cursory search of the terms I suggested will prove, I am not alone in thinking that an SEO/SEM code of ethics is important.

          I'm not some crazy visionary calling for an outlandish idea that has support only within my own mind.

          People can and will disagree over what should be in such a code. That's why I called for a community developed effort.

          I'm tired of seeing a culture of dishonesty be worshiped. It gives a very bad impression to some newbies and gives others the wrong idea about proper behavior.

          We (the very few of us who have spoken out at any time) need official support from HP embracing ethical behavior.  The idea I proposed here could do that, but the same thing could be done with more strongly worded articles at the Learning Center.

          I believe it IS necessary and would improve this site.

          1. livewithrichard profile image85
            livewithrichardposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            And I don't think it's necessary since everything is already covered here: http://hubpages.com/help/user_agreement or click the link at the bottom of every single page on Hubpages.

            "I'm tired of seeing a culture of dishonesty be worshiped. It gives a very bad impression to some newbies and gives others the wrong idea about proper behavior."

            Then quit bowing down to every word Google spews out!  If we're doing something wrong here on HP, HP and the community will catch it and remedy it.  We already have in place all the systems we need to accomplish this.

            Sorry my head hurts so this is my last word on the subject.

            1. Pcunix profile image89
              Pcunixposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              If that covered the unethical behavior that passes as normal here, I'd agree with you.  It may well be that it intent, but as this and other threads have amply demonstrated, it doesn't affect the culture.

              If it is the intent, it is plain that they need to state it loudly and more clearly.

              If not, then you all may as well follow Misha's lead.  Why stop with a little unethical behavior - go for the gold!

  19. Pcunix profile image89
    Pcunixposted 6 years ago

    I don't block ads because its a never ending process and because the advertiser that is putting objectionable ads in one page may be putting very good ads somewhere else.

    You say the idea doesn't fit the community.  Why - because of people without ethics ganging up on anyone who suggests that people should be ethical?

    If you read the Learning Center articles, you'd get an entirely different impression from what YOU say the community is about.  I don't think they go far enough, though, because there is so much unethical advice from people like Misha, SunForged and others.

    I have written to HP asking for their future plans with regard to SEO/SEM ethics.  If you are right, they'll tell me not to let the door hit my butt on the way out.

    1. Jayne Lancer profile image90
      Jayne Lancerposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      But, since you feel as strongly as you do, you could have made that particular Hub 'non-commercial'; after all, you must have noticed the nature of the ads that were (or are) appearing on it.

      1. Pcunix profile image89
        Pcunixposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        I feel no such compulsion.  My hubs speak against such behavior. Readers know that authors are not endorsing ads.

        1. Jayne Lancer profile image90
          Jayne Lancerposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          You are if you allow them to appear on Hubs when you could, in fact, disallow them.
          Your Hub has attracted these ads, by leaving them there you are endorsing the behaviour they encourage. You could just as well have written the Hub with the sole purpose of attracting those ads.
          How are readers to know?

    2. sunforged profile image63
      sunforgedposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Since you continue to call me unethical and I find that insulting, I will bother to respond to you yet again,Mr Wishnik Norfin.

      Im sure your email to HP and your ultimatum will be responded to in the order it is received and with the level of importance its due.

      I would imagine something along the lines of:

      Thank you for your concern, we have outlined our take on this matter clearly in the Learning Center, please review at your leisure.

      We have over 170,000 published adultusers at HP and value them all equally, we also support freedom of speech and expression within our hubs and forums as long as it fits within our advertisers standards.


      something like that would be appropriate. If you expect more, you are delusional.

      You do have quite a pro-stance on having corporations setting policies for you - it baffles me.

      I do consider being called unethical a direct insult and once again do not understand how any individuals actions and corporate policy are related in your thought process, especially a google / user relationship which is default opt-in, invasive and lacking a user agreement.


      I like people and see humans behind these user names, I really dont think you do.


      I do kick myself for responding as I am quite sure you are just bored and lonely and require attention in whatever manner you can get it.

      1. Pcunix profile image89
        Pcunixposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        For your sake, I hope your prediction is true.

        I believe that eventually HP will see the light and ban such behavior as you advise - or at least ban the promotion of it.

        But that day may be far in the future.  Regardless, I have absolutely no respect for you, both because of the unethical techniques you teach and because of your childish  ridicule of anyone who disagrees with you.

        If you are right, I'll be gone soon enough. If you are wrong, your days of teaching how to manipulate Google may be ending soon.

  20. IzzyM profile image84
    IzzyMposted 6 years ago

    I've followed this thread and Nelle's thread with interest - not to watch everyone fight, but to see if anyone could explain just exactly what we are allowed to do by way of backlinking or not.
    I did see the new HP video a couple of weeks back, but no-one else seemed to pay much attention at the time.
    To me they made it quite clear that backlinking to more than a couple of social bookmarking sites was not on.
    Yet it is my experience that backlinking new hubs round a dozen or so sites that welcome bookmarks helps tremendously to not only get the site hub noticed by google, but it helps its placement and thus early traffic.
    Thanks to this strategy I have a huge number of hubs on google's front page.
    Am I now supposed to stop?
    I have huge respect for Nelle but I remember her saying before that she stopped her own routine backlinking new hubs as soon as they were published for a while, and had to re-start because of a drop-off in traffic.
    As far as I am concerned, that initial backlinking strategy is all it takes to get a new hub noticed quicker. I backlink then leave the hub to mature, returning only to tweak words or titles or whatever, but it doesn't tend to get further promotion.
    What is so wrong with that?

    1. Jayne Lancer profile image90
      Jayne Lancerposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      I don't think there was anything wrong with the way Hubbers like you and I were working. It was those who were, or are, literally spamming. In the end, it's spoilt it for us all.

    2. Pcunix profile image89
      Pcunixposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      If you don't care about ethics, then you can do whatever you can get away with.

      A small amount of self serving linking will not attract attention. A larger number will not if you spread it out over time.

      If I had to guess, I'd say that HP policy could be that if the other site doesn't care about your link activities, then they don't  either. I am NOT  saying that is their policy, I am saying it might be, but if that is the case, they should say so.

      If you care about ethics, you only link for the benefit of real readers.  That's insane according to many here.

      1. IzzyM profile image84
        IzzyMposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        No I backlink to give real readers the chance to find my hubs to read them, then if they like what they read they might click on through to Amazon and buy something, else click an advert to leave. I don't write for fun. I write for money. I hope I am writing quality content and that I have something useful to offer, and that is about as ethical as I can get. I'm not trying to cheat the system, I'm trying to beat it so that my hubs are up there for all real readers to find. Just like the rest of us.

  21. sunforged profile image63
    sunforgedposted 6 years ago

    I think you have come full circle now.

    You encourage direct damage to other individual writers/producers income, you accept a corporate philosophy over your own thought process (or at least fail to explain yourself w/o referencing corporate literature). You also are now promoting censorship.


    Your original post also stunk of the "if your not with me, your against me" philosophy that once made so many free thinkers  righteously angry.

    1. Pcunix profile image89
      Pcunixposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Censorship?

      HP censors all manner of behavior.  Why shouldn't they censor promotion of SEO techniques that they do not want used on their site?

      If they are going to seek out excessive promotion, why allow a Misha to tell people it is fine to do?

      1. 60
        MyPostingIDposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        The SEO techniques you refer to are not used "on this site".  They are off-page SEO strategies.

    2. sunforged profile image63
      sunforgedposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      http://blog.hubpages.com/2010/09/the-pa … r-day-hub/ (see comments)

      "It would mean that when Sunforged has a challenge, he could not advise or suggest behavior contrary to the TOS."

      Again, you are requesting censorship not actually promoting ethical standards.


      btw, TLC actually mirrors my own writings as to methods of promotion, I use article marketing,willing community interaction and sites designed for promotion of ones labor.

      You cant go back through the looking glass, you can write at various locations and interlink because it is your own relevant information that you want to share or you can do the same knowing it will boost your work in SE's - you cant remove the knowledge of "why" that is effective.

      1. Pcunix profile image89
        Pcunixposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        You are fibbing through your teeth and you know it.

        You are ALWAYS about manipulating SERP - if you were not, you wouldn't argue with me about that constantly.

        1. sunforged profile image63
          sunforgedposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          I have actually attempted a logical discussion with you about the purpose of promotional practices, fair competition and relevance of corporate philosophy from an invasive service.

          You quickly showed an inability to converse in a logical manner. Since you are impugning specific individuals and making insulting statements rather than discussing an issue - you maintain my attention.

          Again, i encourage you to show  comprehension of what the nature of ethics is and also to show comprehension of competition in the marketplace.

          As for ethics - at this point you can still babble in the crowd incoherently, but any standard of personal ethics you may have have hoped to represent is lying tattered, your personal attacks, cries for censorship and disgusting and public calls to have a single hubber stripped of their earnings on the blog post are all truly abysmal by my personal ethical standards.

          As of yet, you have not bothered to explain what you think ethics are.

          I encourage you to begin here with this basic primer:






          Ive given you ammo to begin how to discuss something as complex as "ethics" .. lets see if "discuss" is within your intellectual capabilities


          Currently, your evidence and logical argument goes something like this:

          http://img.chan4chan.com/img/2009-11-11/mrsq2.jpg

          1. Pcunix profile image89
            Pcunixposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            It  is  you who has engaged in personal attacks and denigration since the first time that  i suggested that manipulating SERP is unethical.  It is you who has gone out of your way to disparage and insult me over and over again.

            Why? Because ethics threatens your methods.  That is why.

  22. girly_girl09 profile image76
    girly_girl09posted 6 years ago

    Quite honestly, writing a voluntary code of ethics is a waste of time. If someone is going to voluntarily follow a code of ethics, they would have done so prior.

    Codes of ethics are necessary in situations where the people involved have high levels of discretion and there are many grey areas; quite typically these codes of ethics are strictly followed as policies so as to prevent liability and are not truly voluntary. I.e, law enforcement officials, medical personnel and attorneys and their staff.

    Lastly, if a person has not developed their own "code of ethics" by the time they're 18 (arbitrary number...perhaps 16), I personally believe (and I'm sure there are those that will disagree), that there is no hope for that person.

    1. Pcunix profile image89
      Pcunixposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      It sets a tone for the site.

      Right now the tone is 'whatever you can get away with is fine"

  23. lrohner profile image84
    lrohnerposted 6 years ago

    PCUnix--So far, I've been called unworthy of respect because I didn't jump at your proposal the way it was framed. Then you called out people like myself who make a living writing online content for money (although I do charge significantly more than $4.00). You topped it off by dissing all of us by saying that HP can attract a "better class" of writers. Would you like to start in on my kids now? My dog? Go ahead, get it out of your system. I know you want to...

    1. Pcunix profile image89
      Pcunixposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      You have jumped in against me in every thread where this has been brought up. Your opinions are well known to me and you are correct - you lost my respect long ago.

    2. Misha profile image74
      Mishaposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      I think he called you - and most other hubbers - a few more names. Unethical being among mildest. May be HP hired him for our entertainment? wink

      1. lrohner profile image84
        lrohnerposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Well, that would be the first argument I've heard that actually makes sense. smile

      2. Teresa Schultz profile image80
        Teresa Schultzposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        lol, perhaps HP hired both Pcunix and Misha - Pcunix for content, and keeping people on the site for longer (reading and providing more content) and Misha for traffic.  Just kidding, but I certainly know I'm supposed to be working and have been reading this thread instead smile

  24. Cordale profile image76
    Cordaleposted 6 years ago

    Pcunix, I believe the argument does not lie in the fact that we would or would not be for a voluntary campaign of any sorts. It lies in the fact that some of these people simply do not like you. I personally don't have an interest either way as I have never met any of you, but the only reason people are "taking the other side" is because they are anti-YOU not anit-YOUR IDEA.

    I hope this makes sense.

    1. 60
      MyPostingIDposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      I strongly disagree.

      From his OP:

      No one would be forced to agree with the code, though personally I can't see why anyone who would not should get any respect from anyone else.



      I believe PCunix brought this on himself with his wording.  If he leaves that sentence out, I think reception is far different.

      1. Pcunix profile image89
        Pcunixposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Yeah, that's pretty funny.

        It would have been exactly the same.  The "whatever you can get away" with folks don't want anything that paints them for what they plainly are.

        As to the rest, they just don't understand that the culture of corruption these people promote affects new members view of HP and helps create more unethical behavior because nobody can speak against it without being ganged up on and shouted down.

        I won't be shouted down. That enrages these people and annoys those who just want to keep their heads in the sand.

        I don't care. If HP has no plans to clean this up, I will be gone soon enough. Until I know what to do, I will keep speaking out against this.

        1. lrohner profile image84
          lrohnerposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          Actually, I think he's pretty dead on. Most of the folks who have opposed you on here don't participate in the very stuff you're going off about. I think that's pretty telling.

          1. Pcunix profile image89
            Pcunixposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            Bull.

            They defend it.  Why would you defend it if you don't do it?

            Oh, sure, they don't do enough that they'll get caught. Does that make it ethical? No, and that's why they hate the idea of a code of ethics.

            Others just don't know much because all they ever learned was  from these "whatever" people.

            Finally, there are those who think it is unnecessary or would be toothless. They are simply wrong.

            1. lrohner profile image84
              lrohnerposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              Most of the people who have posted here have not defended "it." They have pointed out hypocrisy by both HP and Google, and faulted you for your approach. I also have not seen anyone at all mention that they "hate" the idea of a code of ethics. I have seen people say that they think it is unnecessary or unworkable, but "hate" is a very strong word, and you are the first person that has used it.

              Why would someone defend it if they don't do it? I can only speak for myself, but when someone says "it's my way or the highway," you've lost me, whether I agree with your principles or not.

            2. Rochelle Frank profile image89
              Rochelle Frankposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              Anything 'voluntary' is toothless. I also think it is unnecessary and would not add anything of value.

              However, I personally know very little about SEO. I don't backlink-- so  it is moot for me. Perhaps I should not even comment, but since this topic has brought up so much contention, I think it is not helpful in any way.

              When I signed up for HP I read the terms and conditions and was satisfied that they were fair. I agreed. If the terms and conditions change a bit, I will also probably agree.

              I would hate to see PCunix leave over this. I have learned things from him and enjoyed many of his hubs. He has things to teach and can also be entertaining and funny.

              He put forth a suggestion for consideration and that's all it should be. I stated my opinion, and if others disagree they state theirs.

              Can we put this to bed for today?

            3. Mrvoodoo profile image61
              Mrvoodooposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              'Why would you defend it if you don't do it?'

              Why would you promote it, if you don't do it?  For the same reason as everyone else.  Money.  Which of course makes you no better, than those you detest so strongly.

              EDIT - What the guy above said.

    2. Pcunix profile image89
      Pcunixposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Oh, I know that.  That's normal and expected.

  25. Jane@CM profile image59
    Jane@CMposted 6 years ago

    Well gosh golly gee willickers - here I thought Hubpages owned this here site and they made these here rules....I think I'll stick with what they say. 

    People come and go - threaten to leave or stay - its really just another day.

    1. Pcunix profile image89
      Pcunixposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Yes, they do. It looks to me like they have started on a path of cleaning it up.

      If they are going to continue that effort, I'll stay and be happy about it.  If not, I'll leave.  Fair enough?

      So what are you going to say if they start saying that they don't want unethical conduct?

  26. skyfire profile image71
    skyfireposted 6 years ago

    Do one thing- continue your preaching to people who are newbies in SEO and hardly make money or yet to get their hubs indexed Or caught in spam behavior. These types of people are easy to brainwash for this accolade of yours. I hope Mr will joins this discussion for some remarks. Arigatou for yesterday's entertainment.


    P:S -Ohayou gosaimos.

  27. Mutiny92 profile image87
    Mutiny92posted 6 years ago

    Respectfully request that this thread be closed.  It has gone well beyond a discussion on a proposal and has turned into nasty personal attacks.

  28. viryabo profile image86
    viryaboposted 6 years ago

    I'm so disappointed!

  29. SiddSingh profile image59
    SiddSinghposted 6 years ago

    @PCunix

    I am still a follower, and I would like you to stay.

    Why don't you stay, and try to change the rot from within? You see, as in setting an example, an standard for others to follow.

    Why not BE THE CHANGE that you want to see here?

    Let's count the ways how you can do it -

    >> Write absolute cream - I am sure you do it already. What I mean is without any keyword research and all that stuff. If your content is useful, it will be on the top anyway.

    Why don't you pick up some examples from your own writing, and show us the hubs that are ruling the charts for some competitive keywords, like say, digital camera. No, "ding bat bolts" is not a comeptitive keyword.

    >> Write hubs on random subjects - even those outside the area of your obvious expertise. You do have a digital camera, right? Why not write a review, and show us how you take it to the top of SERPs, without using any of the unethical methods that so many obviously use here.


    >> You are not obviously writing hubs for profits - adsense or amazon money - that's what you said earlier. Why don't you make your hubs non-commercial, especially that show those offensive backlinks ads? What do you think those hundreds of readers that must land on your backlinks hubs will thnk? And suppose they click on those ads, and end up purchasing that baclinking package? You have indirectly and unwillingly helped in spread of spam that you so detest.


    I think if you are able to do all these, you will have a large number of converts to what you are advocating.

    1. Pcunix profile image89
      Pcunixposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      I will be making my decision soon. It doesn't seem likely that I will stay.

      In the meantime, I have stopped posting new hubs and this will be my last comment here.

      You don't understand. This isn't about me. This is not about converting you to my way of promotion.

      It's about having ethics or not having ethics.  If you have to be convinced to act ethically, you don't have ethics, you are simply acting in your own self interest. That should be easy to understand, but I know ahead of time that it will not be.

      So, that's it. If I decide to go, you won't know about it.   If I don't, I will resume creating hubs and activity in the forums. That honestly seems unlikely right now.

      Take care and I sincerely hope HP cleans up their act in the future.

      1. SiddSingh profile image59
        SiddSinghposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        I disagree - acting in self interest does not always have to be unethical. Most of us write articles with the overwhelming objective of earning money - definitely an exercise in self interest - and most of us manage to do it ethically.

        The point of contention is what does "ethically" mean?

        Why don't you show the way - if you think you know it? Pardon me, but you always come across as saying "don't do this - its not fair", and "don't do that - it's not ethical"? You just tell how NOT to do it. Do you think that helps?

        On the other hand, an article on backlinks generation tells, step by step, what needs to be done.

        Now, just think of a "newbie" who reads a few articles - which one do you think will be easier to follow and understand?

        Why not leave it for each person to decide for themselves the line that they take? If someone pushes the limits - they know it full well - and they understand the limits too.

        Are Misha's methods unfair? Even if they are - isn't an unfair advantage a good thing to have in business?

        Are they unethical? I don't think so - neither does HP. HP is quite fair in this - even with Misha's methods, they have added a warning - "Don't try this at home".

        I will still say - if you really believe what you are advocating - why not prove it?

  30. WryLilt profile image87
    WryLiltposted 6 years ago

    My brain hurts after just reading this entire thread.

    I'm with Pcunix. Feel free to jump down my throat.

    <3

  31. Randy Godwin profile image93
    Randy Godwinposted 6 years ago

    Good luck, whatever you do, Pcunix!  I don't do the backlinking stuff and just want to be able to write what I like and not worry about any unethical behavior.  I do okay without it but I suppose some really want to gain more views however they can.

    Not being very experienced in any of the technical aspects, I cannot take a side in this fight at this point.  I do respect your attempt at trying to make this site as good as it can be, but I wonder if HP themselves even know what is allowed or not!

  32. sunforged profile image63
    sunforgedposted 6 years ago

    If you do decide to return exclusively to your site, you should implement your conception of ethics there also:

    In regards to Guest Posting as outlined here:
    hxxp://aplawrence.com/publish.html




    By your stated concept of ethical search marketing you are not only providing a platform for unethical behavior you are also profiting from it..




    I might not pay you for the revenue your article creates?


    not sure what your game is, but its not what you represent it as.

    Since I am an article marketer, I have no issue with your guest post system. But I dont see how it flushes with everything you have spouted for weeks.

    1. WryLilt profile image87
      WryLiltposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Like all sites, I think this is more of a disclaimer.

      And an encouragement for people to provide their own advertising, instead of forcing the site owner to work out all the amounts and manually transfer the money.

      1. sunforged profile image63
        sunforgedposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Yes, you get links back to your site - top and bottom.

        you will need to read 30 more pages of forum threads to understand the relevance


        and perhaps look into his take on "disclaimers" ..actually you seem to have missed all relevant factors, do some  reading and you will find the blatant hypocrisy

        1. WryLilt profile image87
          WryLiltposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          I've spent the last three hours reading. Which is why I'm not jumping in with my reasons for agreeing with him - I don't feel like doing a 1,000 word forum post.

          So I'm merely pointing out that I do support him and trying to add relevant devil's advocate remarks on occasion.

          1. Misha profile image74
            Mishaposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            Umm, not jumping your throat, but I can hardly see you agreeing with an attempt to force people to live by pcunix's interpretation of whatever Google's "ministry of truth" spews out, even if this interpretation fits your own one.

            Sorry, it does not really fit the picture of you that I have in my head based on out previous interactions. May be I am wrong, or may be you can benefit from re-reading Nelle's 85% backlinks thread and after it this one. smile

            1. WryLilt profile image87
              WryLiltposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              "No one would be forced to agree with the code, though personally I can't see why anyone who would not should get any respect from anyone else."

              I do disagree with that one part of the OP, but otherwise I am in agreeance with the general idea, as well as many other things that PC has said.

              And from what I've seen of google, they are always creating and inventing and rewriting. That's why they're still number one.  Yes like all big companies they wish to make money. But they still know that getting their reader the most relevant results helps with that.

              1. Misha profile image74
                Mishaposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                So, you agree that I should be booted from this site. This is what he demands several times throughout this and previous threads, and threatens to leave himself if HP team will not boot me and other people who use backlinking to promote. Thank you, I actually thought you liked me to be here. Probably I was mistaken...

                1. WryLilt profile image87
                  WryLiltposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  I respect what you've done, and think you're a great hubber to some extent - the money making extent that is. I tried to get into backlinking and promotion - I really did. But I keep bouncing up against this grey wall.

                  I don't agree that anyone should be booted from the site. But I do think that the wind is changing and soon there won't be any use for glitching the system in the current way. Sure, there'll be new ways. But hopefully, slowly, over time it will become harder.

                  I respect that you write high quality work. But it's also people who automate like you do who keep my high quality work on some subjects from ranking high - and unlike yours, most of it is in fact crap.

                  The winds are changing. And I'd rather not get stuck in the calm.

                  1. Misha profile image74
                    Mishaposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                    I won't jump your throat. Ciao. smile

                  2. Marisa Wright profile image92
                    Marisa Wrightposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                    I had exactly the same reaction, so I agree with you on that score.



                    But you've just proved Misha and Mark Knowles right - because it's the heavily promoted stuff that is beating yours, in spite of the fact they're crap.  And although there are a few voices saying things will change, I fear the change is a lot further away than we'd like to think.

                    One question I keep meaning to ask Pcunix - I know his website ranks well without backlinking, but how old is it?   I get the impression it's quite long-standing, which means it got a head start in the early days when ranking was easier. If he started another site recently and had success without backlinking, I'd be much more convinced he knew what he was talking about.

                    I don't do much backlinking myself but I believe I would make a lot more money if I did.

      2. skyfire profile image71
        skyfireposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        WryLilt, let's assume you own article directory or blog that allows guest posting for purpose of backlinking & traffic. By any chance you'll come up on HP starting Propaganda against backlinking ? social media ?

        1. WryLilt profile image87
          WryLiltposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          I am against smoking. I have sold cigarettes in my work place.

          The line gets murky. Where exactly is the line, eh?

          In a perfect world, what we believe and what we do would be in perfect accord. But as I'm sure you know, this rarely happens.

  33. skyfire profile image71
    skyfireposted 6 years ago

    This.

  34. sunforged profile image63
    sunforgedposted 6 years ago

    your welcome to, of course, but your "relevance" is arguable and without your 1000 word post, not sure any of us will understand what exactly you are agreeing to.

    even with thousands of existing words, im not sure i understand what he has stated yet myself, probably because it changes so frequently and lacks an actionable example.

    1. WryLilt profile image87
      WryLiltposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      As is yours.

      Why nit pick a situation to mere tiny threads based on generalisations from all parties?

  35. sunforged profile image63
    sunforgedposted 6 years ago

    the distinction is with motivation I could show relevance, your tidbit of "devils advocate" showed no understanding of how the quoted text differs from argument at hand.

    but I have no motivation to continue as the quoted guest post system removes any semblance of legitimacy that lingered in my eyes.

    Previously, i believed, the OP believed what he said and only responded when i was specifically insulted, I no longer even believe he had such pure motivations.


    If you cant see how having a guest post system on his site that allows linking and promotes promotion is directly contrary to his previously stated maxims ..then I dont know what else to tell you but to read a little more closely.

    He is not around to respond, feel free to pick up the standard and run with it, at least you are a community member.

    I have no further reason to respond.

    1. WryLilt profile image87
      WryLiltposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Probably a silly question, but are the links nofollow or dofollow on articles by other authors?

      1. Pcunix profile image89
        Pcunixposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        They are no follow - mostly.  I changed that a bit ago but haven't tracked down all of them yet.

        All links in my Review section are supposed to be nofollow also, but of course I could have missed some.

        Oh, and the free consultants listings are 100% nofollow on outgoing links.

        So basically, if there is a link that isn't, it's an oversight.

  36. LaMamaLoli profile image70
    LaMamaLoliposted 6 years ago

    It's a shame it has to get so personal...

  37. Pcunix profile image89
    Pcunixposted 6 years ago

    I asked HP what their position on ethical SEO is.  I got a very short and to the point response:

    "We are in favor of ethical SEO practices. In light of the recent confusion on this topic, we are in the process of modifying and expanding our Learning Center entries that cover this issue."

    So - I suggest we all just shut up for a while and see what happens there.

    And before somebody says something ridiculous like "Well, they have to define 'ethical'", yes, that's exactly the point and is what I asked for originally.

    1. waynet profile image45
      waynetposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Looks like you got a result!

  38. Randy Godwin profile image93
    Randy Godwinposted 6 years ago

    Musical Interlude:


                 "Theme to Final Jeopardy!"

  39. Lee Alexis profile image62
    Lee Alexisposted 6 years ago

    Interesting thread! I don't go to the forum often as I'm, err busy building links but I can't help not follow this thread.

    So here's my take,

    Great minds discuss ideas;
    average minds discuss events;
    small minds discuss people;
    .
    .
    .
    confused minds discuss ethic...

    For God's sake, "good content" alone is never enough to rank so are "backlinks".

    If anyone thinks otherwise, all I can say, "Good luck".....

    Ciao

    1. Pcunix profile image89
      Pcunixposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      You are wrong.  Good content can attract sufficient organic links to rank.

      1. WryLilt profile image87
        WryLiltposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        As someone who had one 'accidental cream hub' in a topic that, when I signed up, I had no idea on the competition for, I'd agree.

        Mediocre content may need backlinks.

        High quality stuff in theory, shouldn't.

        1. Lee Alexis profile image62
          Lee Alexisposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          Yes, (in theory) IF you're willing to wait.... whether it is practical to do so is another Q.

          PS: Don't ever let yourself confused between "mediocre content" and "mediocre keyword" (read: a non-searchable keyword that is easy to rank with no competition).....

          1. WryLilt profile image87
            WryLiltposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            Well I'd rather spend the hours I could be backlinking one hub writing five more. That way instead of 10 really well promoted hubs getting great traffic, I could have 100 hubs maturing and having good traffic.... All your eggs in one basket and all that.

            And I know what you mean about keywords. I rank number one for "dust craving during pregnancy". Funnily enough I'm the only person to write about it.... and am lucky to get three hits a day. lol

      2. Teresa Schultz profile image80
        Teresa Schultzposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        "You are wrong.  Good content can attract sufficient organic links to rank.
        "
        I agree with this statement.  I've had pages that have only a page rank 1 and no backlinks at all come up on page one of Google.co.za results within 3 weeks of posting the page/article (and not just because there's only ten results for certain search terms - sometimes it's been out of over 10 000 results).  When I first noticed this I wasn't even trying.  I just wrote an article to help other people about a certain topic, then noticed its super result.  Next thing I noticed was that the main kewyord/topic was repeated quite a few times in the article, and especially near the top and first paragraph, and I hadn't even thought about it; I just wrote.

        Now, if I do bother to think about which keywords I put where in my articles, I may use something like the Google Keywords Adwords tool or the drop down "search assist" on Google to predict which are the high traffic keywords to target (as Misha suggests), but, at the back of my mind, when doing this, I feel it's unfair to the people who don't bother to do keyword research (or who don't know what to do) yet still want lots of traffic (and ad clicks), so, at time, even keyword research seems a little unethical to me, yet I still do it.  I bothered to learn about it, and sometimes use it.)  I don't like the idea of using different email and IP addresses for backlinking like Misha suggests, but I do like a lot of what else he has to say.
        Both Pcunix and Misha have good points in what they say, and both have bad too - isn't it like that with everyone, nobody's perfect?

  40. Lisa HW profile image83
    Lisa HWposted 6 years ago

    The third link posted by PC has a comment that bringing up SEO stuff is like bringing up discussions of religion or politics.  Wow - is that ever apparently correct.   hmm

    It took a whole lot of "mustering up some bravery" to kick in on this thread, here.  This thread got real intimidating real fast (and I'm about to hit my 3-year anniversary soon, and not much intimidates me on most threads).   I don't know...   Maybe I don't enough about SEO (or whatever), but the original thread/post didn't strike me as all that offensive at all.  I saw PC's idea as something along the lines of the Goodhousekeeping Seal of Approval" (or something like that).  It doesn't "say" other products are bad.  It just says someone made the effort to get the Goodhousekeeping seal on the product.

    Would it (the voluntary code thing) eliminate all the stuff the idea is intended to eliminate?  I'm not even to going to guess or offer an opinion on that.

    I just saw this original thread/post as an idea someone was throwing out. I didn't see what was so offensive about that idea, whether or not anyone thought it was a good idea or a horrible one.

    Maybe I missed some of the goings-on (on other threads) that apparently laid a foundation for the anger showing up on this one; but it does seem kind of ironic that there couldn't be a discussion on ethics (a whole lot of people are in favor of them, after all - regardless of what SEO practices one person or another thinks is within the bounds of "ethics") without things deteriorating quite so immediately.   hmm  I suppose I can see some people's not being thrilled with the idea that the subject was brought up by a fellow Hubber, rather than someone on the HP team.

    Other than to say that I don't get what caused this thread to go downhill so quickly, I wouldn't dare say anything other than that I didn't find it all that shocking or insulting a suggestion.  hmm  Do I think it's a great idea, horrible idea, or just one more idea?  I wouldn't dare say.  (Actually, maybe I don't even know.)  I mean - something voluntary?  Heck, if a bunch of people decided to come up with one cute pumpkin face to stick on their profiles for October (or not if they didn't want to), would that be such a big deal?   Kumbaya!  lol   (Think I'll go look for some mean comments on my Hubs.  They're a whole lot less intimidating than this thread.   lol  )

    1. WryLilt profile image87
      WryLiltposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Hahaha I thought you might be by, after seeing some of the things you've written in the forum recently.

    2. Teresa Schultz profile image80
      Teresa Schultzposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Good post, Lisa.

    3. Marisa Wright profile image92
      Marisa Wrightposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Lisa, you've hit the nail on the head. There was at least one argument going on in other threads - I think some people saw this thread as a deliberate attempt to stir the pot and reacted accordingly. 

      The sting lay in the tail of the OP - " No one would be forced to agree with the code, though personally I can't see why anyone who would not should get any respect

      1. Pcunix profile image89
        Pcunixposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        And I still say that.

        I do not respect unethical people who insist that they wil do whatever they have to do to make money.

        If that makes me a horrible person, fine.

        If you can't make money acting honestly and with integrity, then go do something else. I's that simple for me.  I don't mean to stir up the hornets nest, but that is my deep and heartfelt opinion.

    4. shazwellyn profile image84
      shazwellynposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      You are right Lisa.  We need to respect each other, whether we are in agreement or not.  Talking about ethics - belittlement is not the right way to go.  Please people lets be respectful to each other. 

      Im not actually opposed to the idea - it is voluntary, it is a code and it is (or should be) a free world for people to make choices for themselves.

  41. lrohner profile image84
    lrohnerposted 6 years ago

    Ha! Great post, Lisa! smile

    I would dare to say that 99.9% of what happened to this thread had nothing at all to do with a proposed code of ethics. I would also dare to say that most people wouldn't have a problem with signing on to something like that if HP proposed it.

    Where I believe the problem started was when the OP stated that if someone didn't buy into his way of thinking and his definition of ethical SEO, they were undeserving of anyone's respect. That's not only unnecessary, but it's a surefire way to start a feud and tick people off. In other threads, the OP has pretty much said that anyone who doesn't prove to him that they practice ethical SEO is unethical.

    I really feel the OP took a fundamental principle of business and sent it to hell in a handbasket by using a bullying approach.

  42. Cheeky Girl profile image85
    Cheeky Girlposted 6 years ago

    Okay, I have to ask this question - why have a code of ethics or a standard at all? Don't we have enough standards already? The internet is drowning in a sea of standards and we cannot stretch any more than we already have.

    The badge idea is interesting, but it needs further explaining. But the theory I have formed about people following standards is that standards change and then we are all shifting to catch up with the updated standards all over again. "Playing catch-up".

    The simple truth on Hub Pages is that the most informed and enlightened hubbers will be the ones who have potentially the highest rating or scores here. So we all owe it to ourselves to be enlightened. I would rather concentrate on that, rather than more standards. A nice idea, however. Great thread here!

  43. skyfire profile image71
    skyfireposted 6 years ago

    Without Social media, backlinks you can't pull your site to earn money that BIG,If your sole purpose is to earn money. I'm sure you don't want to earn money in 2019 for the article you posted in 2010 and get NOTHING in between.

    You can't hate SEO manipulators on one side and stick with SEO optimized place on the other. Get out of SEO optimized places and do no-backlinks/Social media and show the same set of results that you get in SEO optimized places. You'll be surprised with the results. SEO in broader view itself shows that it is manipulation- so there is nothing ethical to begin with. Of-course automation tools are unethical due to reason of spamming and both HP and me are against it. That doesn't mean pick one single person who does this in moderate amount and make personal attacks in every single thread. Especially if you can't refer to any official holy search engine resource on which you proclaim many things in every thread and knowing the fact that holy search engine rips off both advertiser and publisher money while displaying unethical content. Warez, porn and piracy sites are still under holy search engine's radar and i see no way they deindex such stuff. This holy search engine behavior tells me that - 'if you want to make money, you need to keep ethics where they have their place'. 

    I'm glad i learned one important lesson from nelle about not disclosing too much information-be it earnings or other. So those who wants to avoid jealous hypocrites wanna-be ethical attacks should keep their earning and other data from forums now on.

  44. prettydarkhorse profile image62
    prettydarkhorseposted 6 years ago

    In writing and actual practices the Big G is not consistent, some are just following its examples! He can't  stick his rules -- needs consistency. It earns money from the people who write honestly like us.  We are like fighting the old "corporate capitalism" thing and it is like a wall.

    I don't pay automatic backlinks but I don't criticize people who do it.

    Ethics is relative and difficult to define. For some reasons, in this particular situation for me, the end justify the means (Kant's morality wont work in our world). The smaller people whose majority of income -- and it is used for feeding their children.

    I applaud PCunix for his stance on this (in an ideal world), but he should turn his "ethics" thing towards the Big G. I had enough of this ideal world thing and what is right or wrong being in the forefront of student activism before. Idealism doesn't feed.

  45. psychlist profile image59
    psychlistposted 6 years ago

    PC, implicit in your suggestion of a code of ethics and followup posts supporting it is the idea that anyone who doesn't support the idea of a code of ethics must be unethical. I think that may be what has some of us up in arms.

    It seems to me that HP already has a code of ethics -- its TOS. Violators get flagged and HP deals with enforcing it.

    An ancillary code with a badge to be displayed on one's page would not stay voluntary for long. If it took off the way it sounds like you want it to, no one would be able to do business without it.

    What would prevent people displaying the badge without having signed the pledge? How would the terms of the pledge be enforced? Who would adjudicate disputes?

    It seems unnecessary to me.

    1. EmpressFelicity profile image84
      EmpressFelicityposted 6 years ago in reply to this



      Exactly. "If A, then B"

      doesn't automatically mean

      "Not B.  Therefore not A".

      1. Pcunix profile image89
        Pcunixposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        I wonder how many times I have to explain the same thing.

        No, nothing can prevent people from lying about their actions.

        It does, however, set the TONE for the site.  And yes, I have, in my response to HP, noted that if they are truly in favor of ethics, it should be site policy and not merely a Learning Center article.  I have had no response to that as of yet.

        We have ethics laws in our US Congress.  Members of Congress violate those regularly.  Should we throw the code out because of cheaters?  Of course not.

        opps - hit the wrong reply button - to address yours:

        I stand by what I said.  If HP has a site code of ethics, I would have no respect for anyone who would not agree to it.

        1. EmpressFelicity profile image84
          EmpressFelicityposted 6 years ago in reply to this



          Tone, schmone lol

          All HP has to is to come up with an unambiguous, transparent, clear, consistently enforced and fair TOS.  And not to do anything itself that flies in the face of that TOS.  Job done. 


          1. Pcunix profile image89
            Pcunixposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            Exactly.  That's what they should do.

            1. EmpressFelicity profile image84
              EmpressFelicityposted 6 years ago in reply to this



              Doesn't it make the concept of an "ethics badge" for HP members rather redundant then?

              I know I keep harping on about this but it's touched a raw nerve.  It seems that in our daily lives we're all being expected to provide more and more justification for our existence and declarations of "ideological soundness".  I once had a job like that, and it annoyed the hell out of me - so much so, that I got out while I still had some shards of sanity left intact.

              Me, I just want to be left alone.  My personal ethical code is just that - personal.  I shouldn't have to trumpet it from the cyberrooftops.

              1. 0
                Website Examinerposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                Me too. I don't do any backlinking, SEO, or anything like that. Why should I have to make a choice between signing or not signing a complicated Code of Ethics? Why would I have to spend my time doing so? Or, if I chose not to participate, why should I be frowned upon by those who did?

                I imagine that a lot of the 150,000 or so members feel the same way. Many of them would be hard pressed to even understand what such a Codex is all about.

              2. Sufidreamer profile image79
                Sufidreamerposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                That's pretty much my take on things - I have never seen the world in black and white and happily inhabit the grey areas of life. I'm happy with that smile

                It sounds like we worked in the same place! big_smile

              3. Pcunix profile image89
                Pcunixposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                I wish you would read rather than assume.

                If HP spelled out ethical behavior in their TOS, there would be no need for a voluntary code.

                As I said, doing that would set the tone of the site. No, it would not stop unethical behavior, but it would mean that when Misha tells people that buying links is fine, others could point to the TOS to refute his lies. It would mean that when Sunforged has a challenge, he could not advise or suggest behavior contrary to the TOS.

                That's what I would like to see. I don't know if HP is ready to do that now, but I think they have to get to that point eventually.

                In the meantime, I think a voluntary code of ethics would be a good interim step. So is improving the articles in the Learning Center.

                Those are my opinions. I fully understand that those with no sense of ethics abhor them. As I have no respect for their opinions, that doesn't bother me a bit.

                1. SiddSingh profile image59
                  SiddSinghposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  I had participated in the first 6o DC, and I can vouch that there was nothing propounded there contrary to HP TOS.

                  If any participant indulged in unethical practices, it was on their own, and not because it was asked of them.

                  If I was Sunforged, I would take this as an allegation of wrong doing - and ask you to prove it.

                  1. Pcunix profile image89
                    Pcunixposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                    I did not say that he did. His advice is contrary to what is commonly considered ethical SEO and is not in accordance with the Learning Center page. If -IF- HP had a stronger TOS that called for a more ethical approach, then SF would need to modify his approach.

                    Again, learn how to read. Your constant misrepresentations are really annoying.

  46. livewithrichard profile image85
    livewithrichardposted 6 years ago

    My only problem is in what you call ethical.  Matt Cutts says that Google is not at all concerned with affiliate links and not all purchased links are a bad thing. He says, “…if you want to buy links, I’d buy them for users/traffic, not for PageRank/search engines.”

    This infers that purchasing backlinks to social bookmarking sites or social networks or any site that is designed for users and traffic is permissible.(This is why there are so many SEO services available)  Purchasing backlinks that are spammy comments in forums or blogs or for the sole reason of passing on page rank is not permissible.

    Buying and selling backlinks is a function of the Internet economy.  It may seem unethical to some but not to those that make the rules.  Matt Cutts Blog

    1. Pcunix profile image89
      Pcunixposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Utter nonsense.

      Here is what he said  at your link.

      As such, I care about paid links that flow PageRank and attempt to game Google’s rankings. I’m not worried about links that are paid but don’t affect search engines. So when I say “paid links” it’s pretty safe to add in your head “paid links that flow PageRank and attempt to game Google’s rankings.”


      Your  interpretation is laughable.

      1. livewithrichard profile image85
        livewithrichardposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Read a little deeper:

        Q: Google’s quality guidelines say “Make sites for users, not search engines.” Put that in context for me; how does that interact with buying links?
        A: If someone is buying text links to try to rank higher on search engines, they’re already doing something intended more for search engines than for users. If you finish that guideline, you’ll see that it’s talking about doing radically different things for engines versus users (for example, cloaking or creating doorway pages). It would be a misinterpretation of that guideline to think “Okay, I can only do things for users, I can never do things for search engines. Therefore I can buy text links, but not in a way that doesn’t affect search engines.” That same philosophy would mean that you wouldn’t create a robots.txt file (users don’t check those), never make any meta tags (users don’t see meta tags), never create an XML sitemap file (users wouldn’t know about them), and wouldn’t create web pages that validate (users wouldn’t notice). Yet these are all great practices to do. So if you want to buy links, I’d buy them for users/traffic, not for PageRank/search engines.


        Your utter ignorance is laughable

        1. Pcunix profile image89
          Pcunixposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          And apparently you cant understand that.

          The very words you highlighted tell it simply enough.

          You want to influence SERP. THAT IS UNETHICAL.

          1. livewithrichard profile image85
            livewithrichardposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            No, I want to influence traffic and that will take care of the SERP issue.

          2. sunforged profile image63
            sunforgedposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            Challenge:

            "You want to influence SERP. THAT IS UNETHICAL."

            Prove it!

            Google is a corporate enterprise, explain how its mechanics are related to business ethics.

            hint: Quoting TOS of Ministry of Information does not constitute proof.

            Try to use logic AND dont forget the "business" aspect and the challenges of competition.

  47. Pcunix profile image89
    Pcunixposted 6 years ago

    This is beyond incredible.

    Every single SEO code of ethics I looked at says that trying to influence SERP by false links and paid links is wrong.

    Google plainly says that, but here we have people so desperate to avoid this that they lie about even that.

    What is wrong with you?  Why do you continue to try to twist away from simp,e truth?

    1. livewithrichard profile image85
      livewithrichardposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Paid links that are meant to pass on pagerank are bad.
      Paid links that are meant for users or for traffic are good.

      Can't get any clearer on that. Maybe you just have a comprehension problem but that link I posted was very clear on what is and what is not acceptable directly from the head of Google's Webspam Team.  If you can provide a more reliable source that says it's not acceptabel, say from Google's presidents or even the CEO, I'd be more inclined to adhere to it. But since I'm getting my information directly from THE ABSOLUTE SOURCE, I'll continue to believe what I stated is accurate.

      1. Pcunix profile image89
        Pcunixposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        What kind of link us fir users and not traffic?

        A nofollow link.

        Is that what Misha was talking about in that blog interview?  Hardly.

        1. livewithrichard profile image85
          livewithrichardposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          There are literally thousands of social bookmarking sites that do not use the nofollow attribute.  Social bookmarking sites as well as directories are designed specifically for users and to generate traffic.  Posting links to sites like this are permissible and will rarely pass on page rank.  Propeller use to pass on page rank through member pages but it's no longer an active site.

          The links that are not permissible are those that suck page rank. These are usually anchor text links that are placed on the primary page of a website and offer no benefit to users of that site as they are totally unrelated to the subject material.

          The link I posted to Matt Cutts blog shows some good examples of the types of links that Google want's reported.

  48. kephrira profile image60
    kephriraposted 6 years ago

    Not sure about whether getting a badge would do anything to encourage people to alter their behaviour. But I definitely sympathise with you wanting to do something. This hub - http://hubpages.com/hub/Get-12-Instant- … r-Hubpages - has been near the top of the top hubs list for ages now, despite the fact that it is basically encouraging people to use spamming as a method for promoting their hubs. I don't think it is acceptable to promote spam as a legitimate way to get readers to your hubs.

    1. 0
      Website Examinerposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      The hub, by TerryGl, has received 315 comments so far. Your comment on the hub was the only one I saw calling the method spammy.

      1. Pcunix profile image89
        Pcunixposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        It is spammy. It is the culture of corruption here, as promoted by those who insist "whatever it takes" is fine , that causes so many uneducated people to not see that.

        'Can!t compete unless you cheat"

        Y'all really should sell T shirts.

  49. skyfire profile image71
    skyfireposted 6 years ago

    So you want this inside learning center ?

    Or want HP's official offense against members with which YOU have issue ?

    Or you want mention of  -"Create a backlink and your account will be deleted" ?

    If they specifically fail to mention their names or promotion techniques then you'll continue this witchhunt against HP members ? Yes or NO ?

    Feel free not to answer this. But i see you are doing no productive thing for Hubpages or for members. You can continue with preaching and conversion.

  50. 0
    DoorMattnomoreposted 6 years ago

    This whole thing is like asking a liar to tell you if hes telling the truth. A person is either ethical or not and no voulintary badge can prove or disprove it.

    1. Sufidreamer profile image79
      Sufidreamerposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      lol

      The best post so far, DM. You have far too much common sense for this thread!

      1. 0
        DoorMattnomoreposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        ahhh...Ive read the whole thing. Its been driving me nuts!!!! but Im done now before I say anything REALLY stupid. (PS No one has ever said I had common sense before. thanks!!!)

        1. skyfire profile image71
          skyfireposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          That's not true. I still remember your post in IQ thread  wink

          lol

          1. 0
            DoorMattnomoreposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            lol  lol  lol  ok, I forgot about that..NOW Im done!!!

            dude, that totally made my day!!!

Closed to reply
 
working