Make HubKarma Useful and Beloved

1. 51

   Hub Llamaposted 14 years ago

   Hopefully the right people see this.
   
   Here is an idea how to make the new HubKarma score both very useful  and beloved by writers on HubPages. Additionally, this would also provide more incentive to Hubbers to link to good hubs thereby giving HubPages what it actually wants from starting HubKarma, better in-context links to the best stuff on HubPages.
   
   We all know that cross-linking and site-linking are important to ranking well and getting lots of traffic from search engines like Google. To this end, HubPages automatically generates links to other hubs based on some algorithm and puts them in the sidebar. The introduction of HubKarma shows that these links lack the power of "real" links both from a Google link juice authority standpoint, and from a human reader actually clicking on them standpoint.
   
   Everyone knows that in-text links are the best. Everyone also knows that hand created links are more likely to link to content that is actually good and thus increase both ranking and readership.
   
   Here is my intro to HubKarma hub that I wrote: <link snipped, no self-promotional links>
   
   However, unless HubKarma becomes unduly punitive (at the risk of driving off good writers) it will eventually become an ignored novelty for most writers much like the accolade and awards that all but invisible to everyone except the most rabid Hubbers.
   
   To make HubKarma succeed at its intended purpose of spurring writers to create better, more powerful, more frequent links to other HubPages content, there needs to be a benefit or motivation to the author. I propose that when an author's HubKarma is above a certain number that all automatically generated HubPages links go away. (That is ideal, but if it can't be done due to programming limitations, then the links generated could be set so that 70% of all automatic links point to the author's own hubs, or perhaps a list of their choosing.)
   
   This provides an incentive to manually insert HubPages links because doing so will eventually remove the other links on each hub which eliminates diluting the power of the real links on each page. That is, authors will be more likely to add 3 manual links when those links are not in addition to 5 automatic links giving a total of 8 links worth of dilution from the author's "selfish" links.
   
   Otherwise, it is a fun little gimmick. I'm sure some people will get a kick out of it.
   
   Just my 2 cents.

   replyreport
   1. 78

      psycheskinnerposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      I see your point that HK will only work for any of us if it is used by most of us.  But IMHO all links have to be "real" even when done for reasons of Hub Karma.  Otherwise you risk alienating readers with spammy and irrelevant links.

      replyreport
   2. 83

      Pcunixposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      So far this tool hasn't made a single suggestion I could accept.
      
      I'd love to use it - not because of HubKarma but because I always want to send my readers to useful content.  But so far it hasn't helped.

      replyreport
   3. 66

      relacheposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      How is it NOT this already?

      replyreport
      1. 78

         psycheskinnerposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         Because there are no automatically generated links, so people can opt out of cross linking.

         replyreport
2. 62

   Lisa HWposted 14 years ago

   That's an interesting idea,  (but - and isn't there usually a "but"  )  as a Hubber and writer, and as a reader, I'm not sure I'd really care if the links went away.  I don't mean to come across as "negative" about something that I think is, without question, a "neat" feature; but as a reader, I never click on in-text links.  To me, they're just "colors" that I don't let distract me from what I'm reading.  Once I'm finished reading, I don't get back, looking for the "colored words".
   
   As a Hubber and writer, I know the new linking feature is handy and helpful, and I'll use it, of course.  There's a point, though, where I can only worry "so much" about links and scores.
   
   I've usually (or at least often) put links to other Hubs "the old fashioned way" anyway.  This new thing makes it handy, and I like it.  Still, I already have to disregard the score on each Hub, and I already pretty much need to disregard my overall score (which appears to go down if I publish something new and then go back up in a couple of days).
   
   As it is, if I have that 100 sitting there, it occurs to me that I hate to publish something new because I know the 100 will drop.  (Today, I'm down to 95.)  It's just kind of an instinct I think we can have to like that 100 and to hate to do something we know will knock it down.  )  In any case, that's why I've had to tune out all scores for the most part.  They go up and down.  We generally don't know what, specifically, makes them go up or down. 
   
   For me (and maybe it's only me), I'd rather not see more "carrots and strings" in the form of scores.  This new one is just a new one to have to try to ignore.  To me, all anyone can do is do his best, go with whatever scores are there, and take it from there.  It generally works out well.   

   replyreport
3. 79

   thisisoliposted 14 years ago

   Tut Tut self promotion :p
   
   Hub Karma doesn't have enough of an effect on a hubbpers personal hubscore to make links no follow. Case in point, my hubscore is still 94-97 yet My HubKarma is 35.
   
   And watering down outlinks is nothing to the damage placing an intext link could have on your earnings, since they are effective it will reduce earnings in both Amazon and Adsense in lost click throughs.

   replyreport
4. 67

   Ultimate Hubberposted 14 years ago

   A good suggestion HL, but I don't think the removal of related hubs from the sidebars will be possible as it will affect the beautiful appearance of Hubpages. However, the 70% thing would be great, make it 80 or 90% I would say.

   replyreport
5. 60

   SunSevenposted 14 years ago

   My observations after using this tool:
   
   1. I understand that it is not perfected yet.Although linking this way is easy, unlinking is not. If I have mistakenly linked one hub and wants to change it, I still have to go to the edit mode.
   2. Broken link fixer : If this tool can combine with a broken link fixer, it will be great, so that it will be easy to fix them without going to the edit mode. If I link to some hubs and they get unpublished or deleted, it will be a pain to go in and fix those broken links.
   3. An undo or change link button will be helpful too.
   4. Better keyword detector, perhaps? not that it is bad right now.
   5. An indication to the hubber to whose hub I've linked to will be another great supportive tool. I think it will create a better hubber relations. I would like to thank a hubber if they linked to my hub and I know it will make them feel good about it. A better bonding among hubbers will help the site, I guess. May be the indication message can be sent by mail or appear in hubtivity.
   6. All in all I will give the new tool 7 out of 10 now.
   
   Best Regards

   replyreport
6. 63

   Daniel Carterposted 14 years ago

   I've read some great hubs about related topics that I've also written on. In fact, some really great hubs are a great extension to some of the things I've written about, so I've contacted the writer in those cases and asked for permission to link their hub to my related one. I haven't done it a lot, but I have done it some. And I think it's actually very helpful.
   
   As to the logistics and all the other details, I don't pay a whole lot of attention to it because I'm more concerned about other things. But placing a statement near the end of my hub that reads something like "another great article on this subject is here" highlighting "here" and making it a hotlink is a piece of cake. Or you could even credit the writer and title of the hub if you want.
   
   I think it's a nice idea. I don't know what all the technical aspects are, but linking and reciprocol linking have worked in many good ways for me.

   replyreport
7. 62

   Lisa HWposted 14 years ago

   What's nice about the in-text links is that we get to look at what they link to.  The thing we have now with related Hubs isn't always all that "great".  I wrote a Hub on "puppy love" (as in "childhood sweethearts"), and along the side of it are a bunch of Hubs like, "paper training your new puppy" and "best dog breeds" - or whatever.      I do think the in-text thing will give readers that "better experience".

   replyreport
8. 59

   ramkkasturiposted 14 years ago

   The auto generated links don't seem  to be appropiate and sometimes have no relevance  to the topic. This is because of the key words. May be the authors can find the appropriate links if there is a way they can generate the appropriate key words or strings and search within hub pages for proper hubs.
   
   Delinking is not easy and that makes it a disincentive too.
   
   Each author may have a preferred place where the links should come in the hub. I give them at the end as further reading as I don't want to have the reader navigate away from the page. He may not be able to to get back and it may be a distraction. I thought  midtext links  are deliberatley  discouraged or even objected to in some sites.

   replyreport
9. 51

   Hub Llamaposted 14 years ago

   Some of these other ideas are good to.
   
   My point was that there is an incentive to getting one's HubRank above 75 (<snipped link - do not link to your own hubs in the forums, please!>) and therefore, people actually care about their HubRank other than those who are just HubPages junkies or those who love to be ranked.
   
   By doing something for HubKarma as an incentive as well, that might elevate it to the status of HubRank. The most logical idea I had was to further benefit hub writers by making the links that they do make more powerful in exchange for ensuring that some of those links go cross-site.
   
   There, of course, would be other ways to go.
   
   Llama out.

   replyreport