More Laughable Moderation Follies

1. 71

   sunforgedposted 12 years ago

   I used to like to bring the silly moderation messages to light, in order to hopefully get better explanations of the new rules that HP created throughout 2011.
   
   Eventually, the lack of definitions by HP just became irritating and I stopped and just left the account to fester.
   
   But, for 2012, I was planning on "rebranding" , creating a focus of only online writing/ebay/hubpages articles and moving the rest around to different sites and even just moving some to existing niche accounts.
   
   Months ago a hub was unpublished for having a pixelated image ( I never even checked to see what they could have been going on about)
   
   I peeked at the  hub last night and there certainly was no pixelated images. So, I hit "submit" without changing a thing. Today, I got this laughable response
   
   (Kudos - to a very quick turnaround time! and Kudos to taking the time to "explain')
   
   But, I found the explanation laughable .. maybe you do to?
   
   
   __________________________________
   
   
   Your Hub has been identified as a violation of our Terms of Use. If this is the first time you've gotten an email like this, don't worry! You'll have an opportunity to fix it.
   
   Violation: Overly Promotional - Solely or excessively promotes another site(s), especially when Hub links all point to one site.
   
   Moderator Note: Watermarked: -
   -
   -
   
   and there are more than two links to xobba.com (Unhyperlinked URLs count toward this total)
   
   
   _____________________
   
   
   All three images are apparently "watermarked" ... sure, buddies, the website logos are "watermarked" with ..gasp .. the website addresses! .. sure
   
   Apparently also now somehow text can be a link, even if its not a link?
   
   Not only doesnt that make sense vocabulary wise, I dont see the purpose, I was under the impression the promo rule was intended to stop spammers looking for backlinks ? No link is a link ?
   
   
   Anyways, ... Im just sharing for s&g , but It would be a nice resource to keep a watch/record of moderation "suggestions" to try and get a sense (or a laugh) of what HP is looking for.
   
   Share your moderation emails and include a "cache" link to the hub for either hubber assistance or to get a laugh. Unfortunately, This one is long out of the cache
   
   Note: No further mention of pixelation?
   
   The hub also showcased other Hubber projects including:
   
   This Is Freelance
   
   thisisfreelance.com/
   
   Excerptz: The Open Magazine
   
   excerptz.com/
   
   Inverted-A Press
   
   inverteda.com/
   
   PubWages
   
   pubwages.com/
   
   Freelance Writers Network
   
   freelancewriternetwork.com/
   
   One Page Articles
   
   onepagearticles.com/
   
   
   the line they referred to as "an unhyperlinked URL" is the words =
   
   "If there was anything better as the base programming, I would be using it already. (referring to the features of a forum software)
   
   forum.xobba.com"   (that is known as a domain name .. it is neither a url nor a link/hyperlink)
   
   and possibly - "Sneak Peek - humor.xobba.com " (which is the text that corresponds with the image that matches)
   
   again, not a URL
   
   for those not in the know (like my moderator)
   
   "Every URL consists of some of the following: the scheme name (commonly called protocol), followed by a colon, two slashes,[note 1] then, depending on scheme, a domain name[note 2] (alternatively, IP address), a port number, the path of the resource to be fetched or the program to be run, then, for programs such as Common Gateway Interface (CGI) scripts, a query string,[7][8] and an optional fragment identifier.[9]
   
   The syntax is:-
   scheme://domain:port/path?query_string#fragment_id"
   
   http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uniform_resource_locator
   
   
   When I read such foolishness, I dont even know how to respond anymore. But, since, Im a writer type, I figure I can at least share and commiserate.
   
   
   ____ shake your head if you like ____ but, feel free to share your experiences as they occur, maybe your experience will actually be something fixable :p
   
   Is it silly to think they are just giving me a hard time for being "mouthy" .. at least I havent been removed from the forums or kicked off the site, like the other "mouthy" ones

   replyreport
2. 66

   Pearldiverposted 12 years ago

   What a Shameless self promotion of a Bad Joke mate!
   
   Happy New Year SF... I guess some just really have No Idea.. but are in Denial!

   replyreport
3. 77

   Garrett Mickleyposted 12 years ago

   Wish I had some to share with you but I've never been told any of my 45 hubs had an issue.  Maybe once I have as many as you, I'll have more issues.  So far, I seem to have followed all of the rules.

   replyreport
   1. 71

      sunforgedposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Considering that they called a logo a watermarked image and that a non-hyperlinked domain name is now considered a "link" ... i dont think i have broke a rule, lol, they did ... a basic vocabulary rule where words have distinct intended meanings :p
      
      Someone is currently unaware of the meaning of watermarked and of url.
      
      So all you flaghoppers if you see a brand logo that includes a domain name - flag it!
      
      And if you see a domain name typed (not a link) - flag it!
      
      Hell, if a hub outranks you or someone irks you or you dont like the cut of their jib, flag it!   A good chance exists that some new reason can be made up!

      replyreport
      1. 87

         IzzyMposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         The whole thing has become really stupid.
         
         This was the hub that was initially unpublished for a having a pixelated image? Guess they don't know what that is either, not is is watermarked.
         
         Non live links never counted, but they do now? How ridiculous!

         replyreport
      2. 77

         Garrett Mickleyposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         You are correct, I didn't mean to insinuate that you weren't following a rule.

         replyreport
4. 87

   IzzyMposted 12 years ago

   I took a mad turn the other night and unpublished loads of my hubs, following advice from Paul Edmonson. It's beyond a joke, I can't even find my own hubs in the search engines under their titles.
   
   I also hid my wifi unit because someone is stealing all my bandwidth, and didn't find it again until earlier this evening!
   
   I was proud of this hub - to me, this is a high-quality, well-researched hub.
   
   http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/s … mp;ct=clnk
   
   It doesn't get any visitors because no-one can find it, but  that doesn't make it a bad hub.
   
   Welcome your opinion.
   
   Anyway, it mentions a banned product - hoodia gordonii, but was written and published before they decided we couldn't write about it.
   
   I got a moderator alert saying that mine would remain published because it was high quality, but that any changes I made to the hub would result in a re-look.
   
   Well, guess what, now it isn't high quality.
   
   So I took off a short Amazon link and resubmitted but no, it is still crap.
   
   I am really upset about this one. It's being told what is a quality hub that hurts too.
   
   "Dear IzzyM,
   
   Your Hub has been identified as a violation of our Terms of Use. If this is the first time you've gotten an email like this, don't worry! You'll have an opportunity to fix it.
   
   Problem: Dubious offers
   
   A link to your Hub: http://izzym.hubpages.com/hub/The-San-B … a-Gordonii
   
   Dubious offers include, but are not limited to:
   * "Watch TV/movies on your PC" content
   * Promotion of cell phone spyware
   * Promotion of video game backup software
   * Promotion of hCG supplements/injections
   * Promotion of medical treatments that the FDA or FTC have found to be fraudulent
   * Promotion of MLM or network marketing programs
   * "Run your car on water" or other dubious energy generation content
   * Promotion of cash gifting schemes
   
   Your Hub has been unpublished, giving you the opportunity to revise it. When you are ready to have HubPages review it again, please edit it and click the "Submit for Publication" button. We will then review your Hub and publish it if it appears finished.  You will then get an email saying that the Hub has been cleared for publication and republished.
   
   Here are examples of high-quality Hubs that you might want to take a look at:
   
   http://hubpages.com/hub/St_Regis_Bora_Bora
   http://hubpages.com/hub/How-to-Refinish-Floors
   http://hubpages.com/hub/How-to-Build-a-Brick-BBQ-Smoker
   
   Please do not submit your Hub for republication until all of the problems identified above have been addressed. Thank you!"
   
   But you know, this hub is fine - http://maddieruud.hubpages.com/hub/Hoodia_Gordonii

   replyreport
   1. 73

      WriteAngledposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      The other hub you cited, Izzy, works on the time-tried Internet-marking principle of slagging off a supposedly dodgy product, but nevertheless containing links for people to buy it.
      
      Apparently though, that tactic is only permitted to the elite here, thus ensuring them a bunch of secure niches where the plebs cannot compete any more.

      replyreport
      1. 87

         IzzyMposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         It does seem like one rule for them, and the other for us.

         replyreport
         1. 71

            sunforgedposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            Izzy, I really dont see a difference in the two articles, you both use a hub capsule to sell a product that apparently HP considers off limits, neither uses promotional language, both seem well researched, not sure that i saw many authoritative external sources on either .. but there wasnt links to other dubious sites.
            
            I would expect staff would lead by example? ... if yours cant be published neither should maddies. In my invalid opinion both should be published as between your two viewpoints i feel well versed now!

            replyreport
            1. 87

               IzzyMposted 12 years agoin reply to this

               Thank you sunforged.
               
               I will wait until the cache clears and hawk around for another home for that article. Such a shame really.

               replyreport
               1. 89

                  mistyhorizon2003posted 12 years agoin reply to this

                  Use the Google URL removal tool Izzy, then it will be deindexed in about 24 hours instead of days, and you can move it wherever you want to a lot sooner.
                  
                  https://www.google.com/webmasters/tools … mp;rlf=all

                  replyreport
                  1. 87

                     IzzyMposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                     Thanks Misty, I've just done that now

                     replyreport
                     1. 89

                        mistyhorizon2003posted 12 years agoin reply to this

                        You are welcome Izzy, it is an excellent and very useful tool

                        replyreport
            2. 95

               thooghunposted 12 years agoin reply to this

               Izzy, it's obviously a flagrant foul and either both, or none should be published. I'm also a little off-put by the lack of moderating coherence regarding my own hubs. On a couple I was so stumped by an overly promotional message that I deleted every link in it.
               
               In retrospect it was probably due to unlinked "links" just like Sunforged but with no mention of watermarks in the message.
               
               Moderation remains one of two things that continue to frustrate me now and then.

               replyreport
5. 0

   Gofygureposted 12 years ago

   One of my hubs got pulled today because it was overly promotional...I had posted a link for further reading at the end, to a website that clearly wasn't mine. It wasn't a big deal though. I deleted the link and the hub got approved again in just a couple of hours. I'd rather have Hubpages be too cautious than too lax, considering Google's growing militancy on such matters.
   
   Sorry to hear you had so much grief about it, though.

   replyreport
6. 82

   Wesman Todd Shawposted 12 years ago

   Eh well, there are definitely issues....but it's the best site I know of to do this sort of thing on....not that I'm only doing it here, mind you, but seem to find that some things here are just "blessed and highly favoured" by the gods of Google.

   replyreport
7. 59

   FloraBreenRobisonposted 12 years ago

   Regarding the term "overly promotional" due to outside links - I quite often set my creative writing hubs to a moderate ad level because no one clicks on poetry hub ads and a shorter poem will be drowned by lots of ads. But I cannot do this if there is an outside link. I have to have the ad level on High. Then the problem disappears.
   I have noted that Google has recently added a monitoring device where anything you use its search engine for that word or phrase then becomes an outside link for you to a page with top searches for that person. This is true even if other people can't see the link because they have not searched that term.  You must have the ad level on high then. And if you have too many on the page, period, you cannot publish.
   
   
   I had to put my latest poetry hub on high ad level because I searched Diana Rigg  and I've talked about her. I have no idea if others can see a link to her info or not. But I can and it's my hub, so this poem is now a commercial hub.
   The only way around that is to use the icognito device on Google chrome when you are searching for something.

   replyreport
8. 87

   IzzyMposted 12 years ago

   After using that tool, and presumably removing it from the index, I come back online after a 40 hour enforced absence when the mobile communication mast was damaged in a storm, to find that the hub was republished yesterday.
   
   This seems to be a better place to ask rather then using email, can I put my Amazon capsules back on?

   replyreport
   1. 89

      mistyhorizon2003posted 12 years agoin reply to this

      I don't see why not Izzy, but not sure whether you are better off sticking to your original plan or not now. Trouble is that if Google did get as far as 'deindexing' the URL, you have now started from scratch in terms of 'aging' of your hub, in which case you might as well pick a place you actually want to publish it and put it there (although you will need to deindex the url again as it has now been republished).

      replyreport
9. 87

   IzzyMposted 12 years ago

   Aren't the moderation staff on here just wonderful? That was a pR 2 hub that they have confined to the wasteland through their laughable moderation techniques.
   
   It never made money, but I think I did sell 2 Hoodia products which aren't cheap.
   
   Oh you know, it really doesn't matter, does it?
   
   I might get a job stacking shelves in a supermarket tomorrow.
   
   At least it'll pay better!

   replyreport
   1. 89

      mistyhorizon2003posted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Don't give up Izzy, there are other sites you can put your work on (like Wizzley, Xobba etc). Even here it might all change with the next Panda tweak, (which is apparently due in Jan).
      
      Keep smiling

      replyreport
      1. 87

         IzzyMposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         I'm hearing that there has just been a Panda update, yesterday? if so, it's not done me any favors but I'm getting used to that

         replyreport
         1. 89

            mistyhorizon2003posted 12 years agoin reply to this

            I haven't heard that Izzy, but I could have missed it very easily. If there has been one I have not noticed any significant changes on my viewing figures yet, (either way).

            replyreport