A Hubbers SEO/SEM Code of Ethics

Jump to Last Post 1-50 of 65 discussions (270 posts)

84
Pcunixposted 14 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.
report
1. 67
  lrohnerposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Are you for real?
  report
2. 66
  relacheposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Well, you've done nothing here to earn my respect...
  report
  57
  Mark Knowlesposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Quite the opposite as far as I am concerned.
  report
  70
  Anna Marie Bowmanposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  I'm with relache
  report
3. 0
  EmpressFelicityposted 14 years agoin 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.
  report
  84
  Pcunixposted 14 years agoin 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.
  report
  59
  LSKingposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  " give a monkeys.... " that made me laugh....
  report
4. 84
  Jayne Lancerposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Not only do I see absolutely no point to this, it's priggish to say the very least.
  report
5. 82
  Sufidreamerposted 14 years agoin 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.
  
  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
  report
6. 0
  Website Examinerposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  No thanks!
  report
73
livewithrichardposted 14 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.
report
84
Pcunixposted 14 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?
report
1. 67
  lrohnerposted 14 years agoin 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.
  report
69
waynetposted 14 years ago
LOL....You're obsessed PC!
report
72
Uzdawiposted 14 years ago
Is this a joke?
report
84
Pcunixposted 14 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.
report
1. 70
  Anna Marie Bowmanposted 14 years agoin 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!!"
  report
69
Cagsilposted 14 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*
report
84
Pcunixposted 14 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.
report
1. 57
  Mark Knowlesposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  ciao
  report
2. 69
  waynetposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  So, it's your way or the highway.
  report
  84
  Pcunixposted 14 years agoin 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.
  report
  57
  Mark Knowlesposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  ciao
  report
  84
  Pcunixposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  So you think everyone is unethical? Is that your final answer?
  report
  57
  Mark Knowlesposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  ciao
  report
3. 0
  EmpressFelicityposted 14 years agoin 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?
  report
  84
  Pcunixposted 14 years agoin 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.
  report
  0
  EmpressFelicityposted 14 years agoin 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.
  report
  84
  Pcunixposted 14 years agoin 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.
  report
  73
  livewithrichardposted 14 years agoin 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
  report
  84
  Pcunixposted 14 years agoin 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..
  report
  73
  livewithrichardposted 14 years agoin 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?
  report
  84
  Pcunixposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Have you even bothered to look at the links I gave or searched for the keywords I suggested?
  report
  73
  livewithrichardposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  I did which is why I chimed in in the first place. Those sites may feel a need for such a code. I don't think there is a need for one here just to satisfy you. You are the only one on this site that is being vocal about it. Why is that? What is your motivation?
  
  I've read your posts in the past that stated that you have tried many of the methods you are now against and it made you "feel dirty." So now everyone else should feel dirty too. Sounds just like a Born Again hypocrite. Please, take your cry for your version of ethics to some other community that wants it.
  report
  61
  TNBposted 14 years agoin 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.
  report
  73
  livewithrichardposted 14 years agoin 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.
  report
  84
  Pcunixposted 14 years agoin 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"?
  report
  73
  livewithrichardposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  You don't seem to get it. We are a community here and we already have a set of ethics which is self regulated. You don't like our ethics so you want to change them to something that is more fitting to your ethics.
  
  I hardly feel THREATENED by you. Your existence means nothing to me in the bigger picture. This community does mean something to me. My friends and followers here are the bigger picture.
  report
  61
  TNBposted 14 years agoin 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.
  report
  73
  livewithrichardposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  I'm hammering the idea because it's an idea that does not fit in this community. Stick around long enough and you might see that. You see, it takes time to get the feel of a community and if Pcunix hasn't felt that it's probably because of his hostility towards affiliate marketers that regularly visit the forums and encourage and advise newcomers.
  
  His idea for a code of ethics materialized because some people here are not getting their backlinks organically and he wants to put a stop to it. I can appreciate that he has the patience to wait for those links, after all he's in his 60's and doesn't rely on this for his income.
  
  Instead of spending all his time on the forums preaching about it he could have better spent the time fixing the source of the confusion.
  
  You see, he's taken the time to write a very well hub on the matter of backlinks but none at all to block the very ads that cause us to question Hubpages stance on the situation.
  report
  69
  waynetposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Lol!
  report
4. 57
  TerryGlposted 14 years agoin 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!!
  report
70
Anna Marie Bowmanposted 14 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
report
77
Shadesbreathposted 14 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.
report
1. 65
  Mishaposted 14 years agoin 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
  report
  77
  Shadesbreathposted 14 years agoin 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.
  report
75
frogdroppingposted 14 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.
report
69
waynetposted 14 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!
report
1. 0
  EmpressFelicityposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  I just couldn't resist...
  
  report
  65
  Mishaposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  It's a blasphemy!!!!!
  report
  69
  waynetposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  ROFLMAO
  report
84
Pcunixposted 14 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.
report
1. 61
  Daniel Carterposted 14 years agoin 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.
  report
  73
  livewithrichardposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Couldn't agree more!
  report
  84
  Pcunixposted 14 years agoin 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.
  report
  61
  Daniel Carterposted 14 years agoin 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?
  report
  84
  Pcunixposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Where did I say that I wanted to define ethical SEO? Go READ.
  report
65
Mishaposted 14 years ago
LOL We got another brave sockpuppet
report
1. 61
  TNBposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Well, as you can see, I created this account 4 days ago when this thread was not around yet.
  report
  84
  Pcunixposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  I do not know who you are, but you give ne hope, at lest. I hope that there are more.
  report
67
lrohnerposted 14 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.
report
1. 0
  EmpressFelicityposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  It tends to have the same effect on pre-menopausal Viking-descended females of vaguely Protestant origin too
  report
  67
  lrohnerposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  
  report
2. 84
  Pcunixposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  What exactly is uncivil about suggesting a voluntary, community developed code of ethics?
  report
  67
  lrohnerposted 14 years agoin 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.
  report
93
Rochelle Frankposted 14 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.
report
1. 84
  Pcunixposted 14 years agoin 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.
  report
2. 84
  Marisa Wrightposted 14 years agoin 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.
  report
  84
  Jayne Lancerposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  My sentiments, too.
  report
  65
  Mishaposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  What goes around, comes around. This is the source of anger on all threads this troll participates in, Marisa.
  report
  84
  Pcunixposted 14 years agoin 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.
  report
  73
  Hauntyposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Maybe resourceful? In a very naughty way, of course.
  report
  84
  Pcunixposted 14 years agoin 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.
  report
  73
  Hauntyposted 14 years agoin 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.
  report
  84
  Pcunixposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  I certainly hope so. I would hate to quit and find that they boot the likes of Misha a month later.
  report
  75
  frogdroppingposted 14 years agoin 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.
  report
  84
  Pcunixposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  If Google could catch Misha, they would strip his Adsense. Apparently he's been clever enough so far to avoid that.
  
  The ads nonsense has nothing to do with this. This is about a code of ethics to counteract the culture of corruption that has taken hold here.
  
  You, unlike some others here, are pleasant. You disagree without being nasty or resorting to ridicule or lying. I respect you, but I disagree.
  report
  68
  rmrposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  It would appear that the "ads nonsense" as you call it, speaks directly to your personal code of ethics. As a more or less neutral bystander, it appears to me as if you speak out about this behavior almost to the point of being militant, but when ads promoting the very behavior that you've denounced appear on your hub, you're not above making money from whatever clicks may result. It's a fairly simple process to block the ad but you've opted to leave it which, to my mind, nullifies your credibility on the subject of ethics.
  
  Personally, I have nothing against you. I'm merely making an observation based on the available evidence.
  report
  0
  EmpressFelicityposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  To be fair, those ads could still appear on his hubs for the 40% of the time that HP's affiliate code is in force, even if he did block the ads on his own Adsense account.
  
  But yeah, I think it's an excellent idea for anyone who objects to these particular ads to block them from their personal Adsense account (I myself did it this morning). If enough people did it, then the resulting income loss for the advertiser might persuade said advertiser that HP is not a good place to advertise spammy backlinks.
  
  Hitting dodgy practitioners where it hurts (i.e. in the wallet) is FAR more effective than a "voluntary code of ethics" and a prefect's badge.
  report
  65
  Mishaposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Hi Pacal
  
  I guess there is some ambiguity here - is Pclown a resourceful troll, or am I a resourceful internet marketer? Or may be both?
  report
  73
  Hauntyposted 14 years agoin 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.
  report
  65
  Mishaposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Thank you sir
  
  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.
  report
  84
  Pcunixposted 14 years agoin 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.
  report
  75
  sunforgedposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  This stinks of jealousy
  report
  84
  Pcunixposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Jealous? No. Disgusted.
  report
  69
  waynetposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Disgusted? no, Jealous!
  report
  53
  MyPostingIDposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  I've built entire sites with purchased content. I guess hiring writers is unethical also?
  
  PCunix....I personally have no grudges against you. That being said, I suspect that you are angry at anyone who is more successful than you.
  
  Why are you on HubPages? Are you here primarily as a writer or are you here primarily as a marketer?
  report
  84
  Pcunixposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  He's not more successful than I. He simply has more Adsense income. Adesnse is only one part of the income I enjoy from web activities.
  
  But even if he were, so what? I have ethics. I don't try to game SERP. I don't trade my integrity for money.
  report
  73
  livewithrichardposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  I'm sorry but the only difference between buying backlinks and buying traffic through PPC is that Google doesn't get a big enough piece of the pie through backlinks except through selling ads like the one on your hub. Another ethical dilemma I suppose.
  report
  84
  Pcunixposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  HP disagrees with you. So does everyone else with even a shred of ethics.
  report
  84
  Jayne Lancerposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Do you really think anyone cares whether YOU consider them ethical, which is all it boils down to in the end.
  Think what you like, and I hope you're happy with your thoughts.
  My husband's just arrived home, and I've got better things to do
  report
  73
  livewithrichardposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  If they did they wouldn't allow those ads on their site. Again, another ethical dilemma.
  report
  69
  Cagsilposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Is this unethical? And, why would it not be, if he is offering a good(product) or service to people who want or need it?
  
  I mean, Misha makes a couple thousand a month, but there is more to it than that and if you don't think his backlinking strategy doesn't work?
  
  I think he might beg to differ. Wherever he gets his readers/viewers/buyers or whatever you want to call them, he does well with what he offers.
  
  He only has outsourced some of the work, which to optimize profit.
  
  You do things your way, other people have found ways to make themselves profit.
  
  If the writer isn't violating Google or HubPages TOS, then there isn't a problem. As for SPAMming links, yes it happens all the time. That's doesn't mean that HubPages writers are doing it. You seem to be standing there accusing everyone of being unethical and you would feel more secure in knowing who is and who isn't?
  
  That would be a nice feature to have in life? Don't you think? But, there is no guarantees in life, so please give it a rest.
  report
  84
  Pcunixposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Again a community created, voluntary code of ethics simply offers a counterpoint to the unethical culture promoted by certain people here. That culture confuses newbies and encourages them to be unethical.
  
  Once again, I'm not a crazy person. Other people do this, and it coukd help attract a better class of writers and create more respect for the community.
  
  Yes, buying links and using automated linking services is unethical and is against both Google and HP policy. So why is he here? Why do fools treat him as a hero?
  report
  84
  IzzyMposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Maybe because Misha has never been anything other than helpful and pleasant, and respectful of other hubbers. He's a nice guy and it shines through!
  Please don't be so disrespectful to the rest of us by calling us fools.
  report
  84
  Pcunixposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  So you think it's fine that a person openly brags of buying links and using automated linking software AND tells newbies that this is perfectly fine?????
  
  Both of those things violate HP and Google policy. You don't care?
  report
  84
  IzzyMposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  HP policy against this is new, apparently, as I suspect Google's is.
  I would like to know the reasoning why, if the backlinking, even paid backlinking, was being done in a responsible manner which I assume it was with Misha being so knowledgeable of SEO.
  The very first I heard about it not being acceptable was a week or so ago when I saw the HP video.
  report
  84
  Pcunixposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  There is nothing new about Googles policy on that. I have no idea what HP policy has been in the past.
  report
  84
  Jayne Lancerposted 14 years agoin 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.
  report
75
frogdroppingposted 14 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.
report
73
livewithrichardposted 14 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.
report
1. 84
  Pcunixposted 14 years agoin 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?
  report
  53
  MyPostingIDposted 14 years agoin 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).
  report
  84
  Pcunixposted 14 years agoin 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.
  report
  84
  Jayne Lancerposted 14 years agoin 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?
  report
  69
  waynetposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Lol!
  report
  84
  Pcunixposted 14 years agoin 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.
  report
  69
  waynetposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  No...come back!
  report
  84
  Jayne Lancerposted 14 years agoin 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?
  report
  53
  MyPostingIDposted 14 years agoin 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.
  report
  73
  livewithrichardposted 14 years agoin 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.
  report
  84
  Pcunixposted 14 years agoin 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.
  report
  73
  livewithrichardposted 14 years agoin 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.
  report
  84
  Pcunixposted 14 years agoin 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!
  report
84
Pcunixposted 14 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.
report
1. 84
  Jayne Lancerposted 14 years agoin 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.
  report
  84
  Pcunixposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  I feel no such compulsion. My hubs speak against such behavior. Readers know that authors are not endorsing ads.
  report
  84
  Jayne Lancerposted 14 years agoin 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?
  report
2. 75
  sunforgedposted 14 years agoin 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.
  report
  84
  Pcunixposted 14 years agoin 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.
  report
84
IzzyMposted 14 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?
report
1. 84
  Jayne Lancerposted 14 years agoin 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.
  report
2. 84
  Pcunixposted 14 years agoin 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.
  report
  84
  IzzyMposted 14 years agoin 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.
  report
75
sunforgedposted 14 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.
report
1. 84
  Pcunixposted 14 years agoin 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?
  report
  53
  MyPostingIDposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  The SEO techniques you refer to are not used "on this site". They are off-page SEO strategies.
  report
2. 75
  sunforgedposted 14 years agoin 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.
  report
  84
  Pcunixposted 14 years agoin 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.
  report
  75
  sunforgedposted 14 years agoin 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:
  
  report
  84
  Pcunixposted 14 years agoin 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.
  report
0
girly_girl09posted 14 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.
report
1. 84
  Pcunixposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  It sets a tone for the site.
  
  Right now the tone is 'whatever you can get away with is fine"
  report
67
lrohnerposted 14 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...
report
1. 84
  Pcunixposted 14 years agoin 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.
  report
2. 65
  Mishaposted 14 years agoin 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?
  report
  67
  lrohnerposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Well, that would be the first argument I've heard that actually makes sense.
  report
  67
  Teresa Schultzposted 14 years agoin 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
  report
69
Cordaleposted 14 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.
report
1. 53
  MyPostingIDposted 14 years agoin 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.
  report
  84
  Pcunixposted 14 years agoin 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.
  report
  67
  lrohnerposted 14 years agoin 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.
  report
  84
  Pcunixposted 14 years agoin 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.
  report
  67
  lrohnerposted 14 years agoin 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.
  report
  93
  Rochelle Frankposted 14 years agoin 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?
  report
  57
  Mrvoodooposted 14 years agoin 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.
  report
2. 84
  Pcunixposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Oh, I know that. That's normal and expected.
  report
60
Jane@CMposted 14 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.
report
1. 84
  Pcunixposted 14 years agoin 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?
  report
75
skyfireposted 14 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.
report
65
Mutiny92posted 14 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.
report
84
viryaboposted 14 years ago
I'm so disappointed!
report
60
SiddSinghposted 14 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.
report
1. 84
  Pcunixposted 14 years agoin 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.
  report
  60
  SiddSinghposted 14 years agoin 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?
  report
86
WryLiltposted 14 years ago
My brain hurts after just reading this entire thread.

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

<3
report
60
Randy Godwinposted 14 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!
report
75
sunforgedposted 14 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.
report
1. 86
  WryLiltposted 14 years agoin 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.
  report
  75
  sunforgedposted 14 years agoin 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
  report
  86
  WryLiltposted 14 years agoin 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.
  report
  65
  Mishaposted 14 years agoin 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.
  report
  86
  WryLiltposted 14 years agoin 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.
  report
  65
  Mishaposted 14 years agoin 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...
  report
  86
  WryLiltposted 14 years agoin 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.
  report
  65
  Mishaposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  I won't jump your throat. Ciao.
  report
  84
  Marisa Wrightposted 14 years agoin 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.
  report
  60
  SiddSinghposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Not only is the website old, or to use the correct term "aged", it is based on a very, very focused topic. I wouldn't say ranking is easier that way, but it is certainly not as tough as more general topics.
  
  I have asked him to demonstrate the same level of success in ranking with a general, and more competitive topic, using only the methods that he advocates - high quality content and organic backlinks. Obviously, the time frame cannot be 15 years!
  
  If he is able to do that, he will get a high number of converts - and the "unethical SEO practitioners" will stand discredited.
  report
  84
  Pcunixposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  You don't get it.
  
  It's not about winning converts.
  
  It's about doing the right thing. It's about not rigging elections. It's not about what this one does or doesn't do, it's abou what an HONEST person does.
  
  Ethics. Simple as that.
  
  HP has told me that they are in favor of ethical SEO. We'll see what that actually means to those of you who don't care about it. It may mean nothing, but I think it is an important start toward cleaning up the culture of corruption that has dominated these forums for far too long.
  
  Their response to my inquiry (because nobody new ever goes back to READ):
  
  "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."
  report
  82
  Sufidreamerposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Good post, Marisa.
  
  That is my issue with the approach - my website is in the freelance writing field, a very competitive area. If I hadn't done a little backlinking and other promotion work, I would be languishing at the bottom of the SERPs with no clients. Everybody else in the field does it, and if I don't, I starve (literally) - idealism does not pay the bills. If that means that I am unethical, so be it.
  
  I also share your opinion on the idea of content rising to the top - I don't see that there is going to be a way of judging quality content anytime soon. Software and algorithms cannot do the job - they can check that words are in the right order, but cannot judge style, voice, flow, or any of the other elements that make up good writing. An organization hiring batteries of cheap writers to churn out generic 'paint by numbers' content will do better than a lone writer crafting sublime articles, through sheer weight of numbers.
  
  If we leave it to a 'voting system,' the original purpose of backlinks, it becomes a case of 'to him that hath most, more will be given.' It is already difficult to compete with the big organisations dominating the search engine rankings. Without backlinking and self-promotion, there is no way that a new business can make an impact - much like in the offline world where the likes of Wal-Mart dominate because of brute force and huge budgets rather than quality or customer service.
  
  I like to see a hard-working entrepreneur with fresh ideas take on the big boys - perhaps I am an idealistic fool
  report
  0
  shazwellynposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Marisa, I made the same observation and posted it as a comment on one of PC's hubs. His website is quite old and well established. I dont think he understands that what was relevant then, isnt relevant today, but might be relevant tomorrow. For today, useful backlinking content that benefits people is a good thing, rather than backlinking for seo. No backlinking at all, for today, just doesnt work. I think this is the only bone of contention that I have.
  report
  75
  skyfireposted 14 years agoin 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 ?
  report
  86
  WryLiltposted 14 years agoin 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.
  report
75
skyfireposted 14 years ago
This.
report
75
sunforgedposted 14 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.
report
1. 86
  WryLiltposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  As is yours.
  
  Why nit pick a situation to mere tiny threads based on generalisations from all parties?
  report
75
sunforgedposted 14 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.
report
1. 86
  WryLiltposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Probably a silly question, but are the links nofollow or dofollow on articles by other authors?
  report
  84
  Pcunixposted 14 years agoin 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.
  report
60
LaMamaLoliposted 14 years ago
It's a shame it has to get so personal...
report
84
Pcunixposted 14 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.
report
1. 69
  waynetposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Looks like you got a result!
  report
60
Randy Godwinposted 14 years ago
Musical Interlude:

"Theme to Final Jeopardy!"
report
59
Lee Alexisposted 14 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
report
1. 84
  Pcunixposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  You are wrong. Good content can attract sufficient organic links to rank.
  report
  86
  WryLiltposted 14 years agoin 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.
  report
  59
  Lee Alexisposted 14 years agoin 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).....
  report
  86
  WryLiltposted 14 years agoin 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
  report
  67
  Teresa Schultzposted 14 years agoin 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?
  report
61
Lisa HWposted 14 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.

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. 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. 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! (Think I'll go look for some mean comments on my Hubs. They're a whole lot less intimidating than this thread. )
report
1. 86
  WryLiltposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Hahaha I thought you might be by, after seeing some of the things you've written in the forum recently.
  report
2. 67
  Teresa Schultzposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Good post, Lisa.
  report
3. 84
  Marisa Wrightposted 14 years agoin 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
  report
  84
  Pcunixposted 14 years agoin 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.
  report
4. 0
  shazwellynposted 14 years agoin 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.
  report
67
lrohnerposted 14 years ago
Ha! Great post, Lisa!

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.
report
67
Cheeky Girlposted 14 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!
report
75
skyfireposted 14 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.
report
65
prettydarkhorseposted 14 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.
report
60
psychlistposted 14 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.
report
1. 0
  EmpressFelicityposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  
  Exactly. "If A, then B"
  
  doesn't automatically mean
  
  "Not B. Therefore not A".
  report
  84
  Pcunixposted 14 years agoin 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.
  report
  0
  EmpressFelicityposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  
  Tone, schmone
  
  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.
  
  report
  84
  Pcunixposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Exactly. That's what they should do.
  report
  0
  EmpressFelicityposted 14 years agoin 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.
  report
  0
  Website Examinerposted 14 years agoin 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.
  report
  82
  Sufidreamerposted 14 years agoin 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
  
  It sounds like we worked in the same place!
  report
  84
  Pcunixposted 14 years agoin 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.
  report
  60
  SiddSinghposted 14 years agoin 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.
  report
  84
  Pcunixposted 14 years agoin 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.
  report
  60
  SiddSinghposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  I know how to read, thank you! I know why you must feel annoyed.
  
  Pcunix wrote:
  
  "It would mean that when Sunforged has a challenge, he could not advise or suggest behavior contrary to the TOS".
  
  These were you exact words.
  
  You have specifically named a hubber and made allusions of acting against HP TOS.
  report
  84
  Pcunixposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Pulling something out of context :
  
  Because you persist, I have to quote myself.
  
  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.
  
  Again, you either cannot read or you are deliberately attempting to misrepresent what I said.
  report
73
livewithrichardposted 14 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
report
1. 84
  Pcunixposted 14 years agoin 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.
  report
  73
  livewithrichardposted 14 years agoin 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
  report
  84
  Pcunixposted 14 years agoin 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.
  report
  73
  livewithrichardposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  No, I want to influence traffic and that will take care of the SERP issue.
  report
  75
  sunforgedposted 14 years agoin 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.
  report
84
Pcunixposted 14 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?
report
1. 73
  livewithrichardposted 14 years agoin 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.
  report
  84
  Pcunixposted 14 years agoin 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.
  report
  73
  livewithrichardposted 14 years agoin 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.
  report
62
kephriraposted 14 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.
report
1. 0
  Website Examinerposted 14 years agoin 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.
  report
  84
  Pcunixposted 14 years agoin 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.
  report
75
skyfireposted 14 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.
report
0
DoorMattnomoreposted 14 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.
report
1. 82
  Sufidreamerposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  
  The best post so far, DM. You have far too much common sense for this thread!
  report
  0
  DoorMattnomoreposted 14 years agoin 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!!!)
  report
  75
  skyfireposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  That's not true. I still remember your post in IQ thread
  
  report
  0
  DoorMattnomoreposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  ok, I forgot about that..NOW Im done!!!
  
  dude, that totally made my day!!!
  report

Closed to reply

jump to first post

12 Next

Necessary
HubPages Device ID	This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.
Login	This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.
Google Recaptcha	This is used to prevent bots and spam. (Privacy Policy)
Akismet	This is used to detect comment spam. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Google Analytics	This is used to provide data on traffic to our website, all personally identifyable data is anonymized. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Traffic Pixel	This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.
Amazon Web Services	This is a cloud services platform that we used to host our service. (Privacy Policy)
Cloudflare	This is a cloud CDN service that we use to efficiently deliver files required for our service to operate such as javascript, cascading style sheets, images, and videos. (Privacy Policy)
Google Hosted Libraries	Javascript software libraries such as jQuery are loaded at endpoints on the googleapis.com or gstatic.com domains, for performance and efficiency reasons. (Privacy Policy)

Features
Google Custom Search	This is feature allows you to search the site. (Privacy Policy)
Google Maps	Some articles have Google Maps embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
Google Charts	This is used to display charts and graphs on articles and the author center. (Privacy Policy)
Google AdSense Host API	This service allows you to sign up for or associate a Google AdSense account with HubPages, so that you can earn money from ads on your articles. No data is shared unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Google YouTube	Some articles have YouTube videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
Vimeo	Some articles have Vimeo videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
Paypal	This is used for a registered author who enrolls in the HubPages Earnings program and requests to be paid via PayPal. No data is shared with Paypal unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook Login	You can use this to streamline signing up for, or signing in to your Hubpages account. No data is shared with Facebook unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Maven	This supports the Maven widget and search functionality. (Privacy Policy)

Marketing
Google AdSense	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Google DoubleClick	Google provides ad serving technology and runs an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Index Exchange	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Sovrn	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook Ads	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Unified Ad Marketplace	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
AppNexus	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Openx	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Rubicon Project	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
TripleLift	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Say Media	We partner with Say Media to deliver ad campaigns on our sites. (Privacy Policy)
Remarketing Pixels	We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.
Conversion Tracking Pixels	We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.

Statistics
Author Google Analytics	This is used to provide traffic data and reports to the authors of articles on the HubPages Service. (Privacy Policy)
Comscore	ComScore is a media measurement and analytics company providing marketing data and analytics to enterprises, media and advertising agencies, and publishers. Non-consent will result in ComScore only processing obfuscated personal data. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Tracking Pixel	Some articles display amazon products as part of the Amazon Affiliate program, this pixel provides traffic statistics for those products (Privacy Policy)
Clicksco	This is a data management platform studying reader behavior (Privacy Policy)

A Hubbers SEO/SEM Code of Ethics

Arts and Design

Autos

Books, Literature, and Writing

Business and Employment

Education and Science

Entertainment and Media

Family and Parenting

Fashion and Beauty

Food and Cooking

Games, Toys, and Hobbies

Gender and Relationships

Health

Holidays and Celebrations

Home and Garden

HubPages Tutorials and Community

Personal Finance

Pets and Animals

Politics and Social Issues

Religion and Philosophy

Sports and Recreation

Technology

Travel and Places

About Us

This website uses cookies

A Hubbers SEO/SEM Code of Ethics

Related Discussions

This website uses cookies