An Open Letter To Hubpages

I've meant to write this open letter
for quite sometime but, (and this
is the most crucial point),other
things were more important.

Other sites were more important.
Other writing sites were more
important.

That is because other writing sites either have human moderation or no moderation;
Not A.I. moderation.

No writing site which desires to attract human readers can be moderated by an application, no matter how good, nor; and this point will gain some explanation, by so-called 'peer-review."

When I first saw the empty circle/half circle, I went to the page to see what was
wrong. In some case, I had left out a summary or some other easy to fix correction.

However, when I saw those symbols reappearing and an 'editorial' remark; i.e. a complaint about the use of italics or bold, (especially when the use of italics or bold was quite necessary for the prose), I realised the 'flag' had been posted by A.I.

I don't listen or talk to A.I.

.

When a human writes, (and I'm using the term 'write' in a very limited capacity, meaning actually writing prose, not SEO crap) various devices enhance the prose. By setting off a few lines of dialoge in italics, by bolding a reference, a writer can convey distinguish and emphasise, for the eyes of a human being.

A human being will appreciate the italics; for it is another 'voice'. A human being will appreciate the 'bolding' making the term significant.
A.I. will not.
And let me be blunt; I don't write for A.I. I write for human beings.

Sure, the A.I. would love me if I did 1000 words of blah blah with the constant repetition;

"Today everyone is interested in weight lose. All over the world people are concerned about weight loss. There are many products and methods which deal with weight loss...."

but I'd puke all over my computer and that would cause the keys to stick.

People like to read 'unique' prose. They like to feel the writer is writing to them.

Maybe the first time they encounter one of those S.E.O. constructed items they believe it is saying something, and begin to read.

Hardy souls will read the whole 2k word feces,
Others will realise, maybe halfway through, that it isn't saying anything.
And those who have seen this kind of :

"Today everyone is interested in weight lose. All over the world people are concerned about weight loss. There are many products and methods which deal with weight loss...." stop reading after the second sentence.

Yes, years ago this kind of garbage did get the Search Engines, did get on Page 1 of a Google.

Now?

Most Netizens, doing a search, look at the address before clicking on the site. They avoid sites which have, in the past, thrown up that kind of two thousand word Hubpage feces.

Over the past two years, I have taken many of my empty circles, which are 'not featured' articles, and republished them.

I've gotten lots of hits on the site where they are published. This is because on other sites they either have human moderators or no moderators.

A human moderator would appreciate clever turns of phrase, artistic uses of italics, bold, a deliberately blurred image.
A.I. would not.
Hence I have no intention of changing my work to please software. I will publish elsewhere.

As the item isn't featured here, the fact it was published in 2010 and got 1k hits doesn't matter. The search engines won't turn up the item. The possibility of 'plagiarism' doesn't exist.

Although I usually rewrite a bit before republishing, I don't have to. I can simply copy an item, and paste it on another site.

Getting that empty circle means the item is not published, hence it gives me Carte Blanche to publish it on a new site.

Thank You Hub Pages!

Most writers, that is, those who write for human readers, have adopted this method.
That is why other sites are not considered 'content farms'.
That is why other sites are gaining viewers and Hubpages is losing them.

.

On another site, there was voting. Garbage got the highest votes. This is because the writer of garbage spent every moment voting down the work of others.

What do you think Hubhopping is?

It is not the concerned volunteer who is honestly reading and flagging, it is some demi-troll who will join in ten different nicks if she has to, to cut down on the value of another person's writing.

With so many 'flags' clearly the item can not be featured, and since there is no human being who is available to review, and take proper action, the item, which might be superb, will be shoved at the bottom. The writer, like myself, will simply take it and place it elsewhere.

Of what benefit is it to Hubpages for this to happen?

Interestingly, items I published in 2010 - 2012 which raised my 'standing' to the high 90s, now are 'not featured' and my standing here, alas, is 78. How does one for from 98 to 78 with the same work?

Simple.

Upset a demi-troll who has no life and is willing to spend her life flagging my work.
My work, your work, whosever work comes before her.

One would have assumed, at least from 2010, when Google announced
its change of algorithm, that Hubpages would have gotten paid moderators.
Why not?
It had 12 million views every month.
It was making $$.
But it didn't.
It introduced glitchy software and so, Google gave it a minus score.

This means, if I write " An easy diet for Weight Loss" on Patty's Blog and
"How to Lose Weight" on Hubpages, and a Netizen enters; "How To Lose Weight" in a Search, Patty's Blog ranks higher so comes before Hubpages.

So Hubpages went from 12 Million, to 6 Million, to 3 Million to currenly about 5 Million...(and if you pop onto Compete.com you'll see the latest figures).

There is no reason to wonder why so many writers don't waste a keystroke "Correcting' their work. In most cases, it isn't wrong.

Hire human moderators.

Once items are subjected to human views, the A.I. can be tweeked so that it doesn't force a writer to remove all bold and links, Especially when the bold is necessary and the links substantiate the facts in the piece.

Stop Hubhopping

The worst people hop the most, which is why, if a search was done as to the top articles of 2010 and they were viewed today, one would see they are no longer featured. Not because of their lack of substance but because of animosity.