"Here we are on day two of a massive algorithmic change and we really don't know what changes, if any we will need to implement, but just to keep Matk Writer happy, here's what we are going to do - subject to immediate change on Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday as we find out more!"
How long have you been here? How many hubs do you have published? What makes you think you can demand explanations?
I've been here for a little while and the number of hubs on this account is only about 10% of the total hubs I have published across the site.
I'm not demanding anything from them. They're smart individuals, and their collective talent and skill has seen this site make it into the Quantcast Top 50. Their livelihoods rely on this site far more than any of us.
Thanks, darkside, for such refreshing words. I think it's time for Hubbers to stop pointing fingers at staffers and engage fully in improving this site at the grassroots level. Why do we insist on interrogating, blaming them when there's plenty we can do to rid this site of substandard, duplicate content and spammers. Let's take some responsibility for the current Google situation-flag and report if need be. How about improving this site?
I was fine with Maddie's "we are on it," because I am certain they are. I cannot imagine they are not going to be "on it," and I would be worried if they were all over the forums telling us not to worry about it.
As for the sock puppet - grow a pair and use your real persona.
Well as some people don't seem to be able or willing to follow a simple rule, then it should be implemented. It would be interesting to see how many hubbers have spent whole threads talking to themselves! LOL
I think you will find that his main site does receive that many hits, Jim
Why don't you let the people who actually use Hubpages for writing hubs discuss these important developments, without being subjected to snide remarks? PCUnix's internet experience and input is proving invaluable here.
After all, "every month" also includes this February, which is a bit light at only 218,000 uniques so far.
So, as usual, you have caught me in a heinous lie.
I should have known better than to try to fool you, Jim.
So, in the interests of total honesty, I went back to Analytics and asked for yearly figures, which I then divided by 12. After all, not every visitor shakes their head in horror and never returns - some keep coming back, and of course that means a lower yearly average of truly unique readers.
Because I can't lie when the eagle eyes of Jim are watching, the true figure was only 2,433,171 yearly uniques, which is a paltry 202,764 per month on average.
So, I fibbed, Jim, and you caught me. Thanks for making me be honest.
By the way, Jim, I have to thank you for something else.
I forgot that I had added Quantcast measuring to my main site some time ago. Because of my shame at being caught lying (again!) by you, I went and checked that site there and was horrified to see that they only see 183,000 monthly visitors!
That's not good, because potential advertisers use that data to see if they want to bother with you (I'm sure YOU know all that, Jim - I'm just explaining for the others).
So, your catching me out will actually help me in the end! Thank you, Jim, thank you so much!
No, because you are being a scardy cat. You logged out of your primary account to post a message criticising ryankett and to call him a "big girl", because you didn't have the guts to come out and say it to his face - if you wish to prove otherwise then feel free to log back into your primary account and call him out like a man
You know who I am, who are you? A coward, weak, pathetic, the cretinous type who doesn't have the balls to stand up and be counted, instead hiding behind a fake identity in order to dish out remarks in an attempt to discredit or hurt people, without the security to allow them the opportunity to do it back.
And just as another point of reference, my Google traffic here is down only 10% - if that, it's the February vacation weekend for crying out loud! - and I see a bunch of pretty red triangles in my traffic reports.
my personal sites are all on the upswing, my Hubs took a hit. My personal opinion is that duplicate content has had a greater affect on hte domian trust of Hubpages, which has in turn negatively affected the page trust of individual articles.
I also think that we all need to wait for the dust to settle. This is a big change, at a slow time of the year. Most of the real complaints have been coming from sites which are notoriously filled with spammers and dupe content users.
Yes, the revenue sharing site is holding steady with a fairly significant boost in traffic over the last few days. I don't want to claim all of that as a change in the google algorithm, since it coincided with a rash of stumbles on one of the articles, but half of the above-average traffic was organic.
Me too. Like I said: when your house is on fire,which would you prefer - that every firefighter is in there trying to save it, or that some of them sit with you and hold your hand while you're waiting?
Not that I know anything but I would imagine that the hub staff needs to think some things through, have some meetings, discuss strategy before jumping on it. Also, maybe some hubbers have made helpful suggestions they may take into account.
Now ezines, for example, has already said they are going to no follow and drop the do follow. I think that is jumping the gun.
What Ezine have also said however is that they are going to increase the rejection rate from 40% to 50%, block posts which are less than 400 words long, and refuse ALL duplicate content.
I doubt that Hubpages blocks 50% of content, and neither do they have a filter in place which blocks short hubs, neither do they block all duplicate content. So there is plenty that perhaps can be learnt from Ezine.
It's funny, because I remember when Ezine used to insist on unique content. Then they changed their rules and accepted duplicate articles - in fact they were so keen on the idea, they published a video encouraging people to re-post their Helium articles and even auto-publish using a Wordpress plugin!
So it looks as though they're just going back to their original philosophy by returning to original content.
The 400 word minimum is interesting. Helium has had that in place for a long time - I know it doesn't guarantee quality but it does force people to make more of an effort, and it would be easy to implement.
Yes, Helium didn't get a mention on any of the analysis sites for a while - I think because it's a much smaller fish - but it's now listed as having lost 66% of keywords.
As you know, you don't earn affiliate income from Helium, they pay writers rev share themselves. And you don't have access to traffic stats. I suspect there's a fair lag before they pass on the earnings, so there's no sign of a change yet. Heliumites over on their forums are congratulating themselves on surviving the storm - they may be in for a surprise!
I haven't written an article there for three years, the earnings are so absymal - but I do have to go and "rate" to keep the existing articles earning, so I pop in to the forums now and then and stir things up a bit...
Interesting, I didn't think they allowed affiliate links. I do know their links are "no follow" so Helium isn't useful for promotion. I may have to go and leapfrog a few and see if I can get some affiliate links in there!
Yes, they do - but as you say, everyone forgets about them! I wonder how many visits they get? The zones do have Adsense, but then so does the main site - that's the source of the passive income side of the site, but you don't get paid directly by Adsense.
I found it amusing that they were surprised by the backlash.
Their reaction was (I'm paraphrasing), "but we stopped advertising EZA as a source of backlinks in 2005". Their argument is that you write on EZA so real people will click on the links in your resource box.
It makes you wonder how savvy EZA's management really are. On a site that's so Adsense-heavy, most readers will have clicked on an ad long before they get down to the resource box. And on blogs which re-use EZA material, the resource box is often stripped out anyway. Surely EZA know that - who are they trying to kid?
First, apologies to Tori since it will SEEM like I'm picking on her HotD - I'm not. These featured hubs need to be touched by an editor if Hubpages is ever going to be taken seriously as a 'real' writing site.1. The...
Lately, I have had 11 hubs unfeatured due to Quality Issues. I have assured my hubs do not contain grammatical or spelling errors. I have included relevant video and changed the titles and added new supporting texts and...
Sorry for the inconvenience- but that's what I just saw. HubPages staff, Jason Menayan, who runs another account called 'livelonger', just posted here in the link below, to save the Hubs from sinking??? Hah!I quote...
Yesterday I invited a friend to try the hubpages. She declined stating that most of the staff are narcissistic head hunters who have a degree in English, play head games with the users they don't like, are unfair in...