Squidbits – Greekgeek's Squidoo Blog Rotating Header Image

Squidoo Image Sizes, Format and URLs: Under the Hood

May 15th, 2012
by Greekgeek.
No comments yet

Ever wondered what image sizes work best on Squidoo?

In the following cases, there's a maximum width (but not height); Squidoo shrinks the graphic to fit but keeps the height proportional if you give it something larger. Best to let Photoshop or an image resizer to do it; Squidoo's built in shrinker isn't as smart.

  • The width of the Squidoo column (e.g. Text with BIG Picture module) is 590 pixels wide.
  • The lens logo graphic and the graphics that can be uploaded to the Text module are a maximum of 250 pixels wide; Squidoo shrinks them to fit.
  • Lensmaster photo on your profile page: 120 pixels wide.
  • The Polaroid Module is 400 pixels wide.
In the following cases, Squidoo needs the graphic to be absolutely square. It does this by scaling the graphic to the specified width, then cropping or adding whitespace to the top and bottom to make a perfect square.
  • Lensmaster photo in bio box on lens: 70x70 square
  • "Related Lenses" in the sidebar (Discovery Tool): 70x70 square
  • Featured Lenses module: 60x60 square
  • Front page of Squidoo: 200x200 square

Instead of using keywords for the lens logo graphic, Squidoo replaces the filename with a long string of numbers. If you replace the graphic, it keeps the same string of numbers, so external tools like SquidTool's Featured Lenses tool will still work.

Want to see how your lens graphic looks at different sizes (e.g. the featured lenses module, related lens sidebar, etc)?

1. Go to your lens and right-click the lens graphic to get its url.

Example (this is a lens logo, so it's 250 pixels wide):

Greekgeek's 3D Computer Art

In the published version, it's something like:

http://i2.squidoocdn.com/resize/squidoo_images/-1/lens8511111_12605777923d-computer-art.png

In the Lens workshop, it's different (so that you don't replace the published version by accident before you're ready):

http://i2.squidoocdn.com/resize/squidoo_images/250/draft_lens8511111_12605777923d-computer-art.png

Want to see how it looks at different sizes? Then change the -1 (in the URL of the published version) or the 250 (in the URL from the workshop) to the desired width.

For example:

= http://i2.squidoocdn.com/resize/squidoo_images/70/lens8511111_12605777923d-computer-art.png

 

= http://i2.squidoocdn.com/resize/squidoo_images/120/draft_lens8511111_12605777923d-computer-art.png

That shows you the graphic scaled to different sizes. But remember, for the Squidoo front page, the "Related lenses" sidebar graphic, and the Featured Lenses module, the graphic will be cropped square.

Squidoo has done something with CSS classes to make it crop exactly in the middle, and you know what? I still can't replicate what they're doing to make the square crop. So just know that it's the exact middle of the graphic.

Need to figure out the image size of a graphic you've found somewhere else? See How to Tell an Image's Size, both pixel dimensions and file size/memory.

As for formats, Squidoo allows the following:

  • gif: no animation allowed, and no transparency (it makes a black background). gifs have a maximum of 256 colors; if you save a photo as a gif it gets a bit posterized. gifs use very little memory and are fast-loading.
  • jpg: this is usually the best format for Squidoo. It uses less memory by compressing the photo somewhat (cheating to save space). If you look closely, you may find jpgs have lost some detail, like YouTube videos but not quite as bad because the data isn't compressed (simplified to save memory) quite as much.
  • png: this format is a memory hog, but preserves the colors and pixels accurately. Larger-sized pngs may not upload on Squidoo (I think the max may be 1MB, not sure). The only problem is that, as with transparent gifs, where one color is designated to be transparent and let the background page color show through, Squidoo fills in the "transparent color" with black. The way to avoid this is to uncheck transparency when saving a png, or save it as a jpg and put up with the slight loss of resolution.

You should know that picture quality always degrades slightly if you upload an image into Squidoo's text or introduction module. Photo quality is better if you save a high-quality jpg or png and upload it to your own website or a service like Flickr. (I love being able to upload images to my own site; I can give each photo its own filename AND folder name, which means a lot of keywords I can use to optimize the lens where those images are displayed.)

Posted in: Graphics Tips.
Tagged: ·

Maximize Traffic from the Front Page of Squidoo

May 12th, 2012
by Greekgeek.
No comments yet

We've had a SquidU discussion about the recent SquidCademy quest, whose prize was getting your lens featured as one of the rotating selections on the front page of Squidoo.

I've been pondering how to squeeze the most traffic out of the two to four week window when your lens is part of the rotation.

Here's some things to remember.

  • If Squidoo HQ issues a challenge or quest with a Squidoo front page feature, go for it. It'll mean extra traffic for two to four weeks if you get accepted.
  • They favor lenses with strong, visually appealing graphics. Once I entered one of these challenges and got the points and purple star, but did not get a front-page feature, probably because the graphic wasn't as good.
  • The number one way to maximize traffic from the front page of Squidoo is through the lens graphic. People arriving on the front page of Squidoo didn't arrive via a search of a topic, so they're not targeted traffic. Instead, they're liable to click the picture that stands out from the rest with its visual appear.
  •  So use a crisp, clear, compelling graphic with a strong silhouette, possibly a white background (See my "Hook Visitors with Key Art Designs" tutorial for tips).
  • Check to see how it looks on Squidoo's front page (especially if your graphic's not square; Squidoo will crop it to a square). You can safely tweak, adjust, upload the graphic, and republish until it looks good (thanks to KathyMcGraw for asking if changing the graphic would cause any problems — it doesn't. The graphic changed on the front page immediately after republishing).
  • While a front page feature will bring visitors because of all the people landing on the Squidoo.com gateway, it's useless for SEO purposes. I Googled cache:http://www.squidoo.com/ and double-checked with Webconf's Search Engine Spider Simulator, and both of them show that the current featured lenses are not crawled or indexed. The lens gallery is generated only when you're viewing Squidoo.com live, so Google doesn't see those links.
  •  Oddly, the testimonials are stored, so a random few lucky lensmasters get extra backlink juice if their testamonial is showing when Google's spider comes by (which happens often). If Squidoo ever solicits us to write more blurbs, do it.
  • Also, of course, Squidoo Categories are featured in the sidebar, and those links are hard-coded, so getting your lens on any of the category or subcategory pages will get some trickle-down pagerank from the top level of Squidoo.com.

Posted in: Squidoo Tips.
Tagged: · · ·

Making Money Selling Zazzle Art on Squidoo

May 11th, 2012
by Greekgeek.
5 comments

On my Want Graphics? Promote Zazzle Designs lens, our spiffy-hatted member TxCowboyDancer posted in the guestbook:

One question: Do you have a couple/three/four examples of "good lenses" that promote Zazzle?

OOPS! Confession time! While I do have the odd Zazzle graphic on my lenses, like my Sea Hare lens using a funny T-shirt to jazz up the guestbook, my lenses about my shops are seriously out of date...they're still featuring Cafepress designs!

Here's one, and it's sneaky: my Funny Signs and Billboards lens includes a Zazzle gallery with "Demotivational Posters" whose spoof punchlines are a little too small to read, so visitors tend to click on them to view the posters on Zazzle. I haven't sold too many, but at least this helped the lens get more clickouts (which impact its lensrank).

What about a lens dedicated to showcasing Zazzle art — either your own, or other people's— to get a commission? Let's check out some other members' fine lenses featuring Zazzle products. I did a quick search for the "zazzle" tag on Squidoo and checked the results against Fluffanutta's Squidaholic tool to see what kind of traffic they're pulling in, since I can't tell how well they're selling. So, the comments below are about how the lens is laid out, how products are presented, and (because I know this stuff) some basic SEO-for-Zazzle tips.

(more...)

Posted in: Making Money.
Tagged: · ·

Two Kinds of Reviews: Know Which You're Writing!

May 9th, 2012
by Greekgeek.
6 comments

Trial and error has once again revealed a useful insight for affiliate marketing: there are two kinds of reviews, and if you write wrong kind for your product and target audience, you can kiss sales revenue goodbye.

Hard-to-Find Products

Examples of this are my review of a cheap hard case for an old Macbook whose polycarbonate case was known to crack, a special kind of baits to kill the little black ants invading California, or collectible figures imported from Japan that are hard to find in the states. Here, the buyer has a problem or an idea what she's looking for, but either doesn't know the exact brand and model name (what to type into Amazon to find it), or it's not available on ordinary retail sites like Amazon.

With all of these products, I use the products's very specific name for the article to help it get picked up in search engine results, or, more often, ("hard case for old Macbook") I did some keyword research with Google's keyword tool to discover what people type when looking for that kind of product.

The "specific name" approach works for products that are difficult to find, or are sought by collectors. The "keyword research" approach works very well if you can zero in on a question or phrase people tend to Google when they're looking for the solution to a problem.

However, there are several examples where the "specific name" approach failed to get much traffic. See if you can determine a pattern:

What's the problem? People aren't liable to type out "review of Herman miller Aeron chair." Either they already have the Aeron chair and have formed an opinion about it, or they go straight to Amazon or some e-merchant they trust and look for product reviews on the site where they intend to buy the product.  Why Google for a product review when there's already dozens right on the product page on Amazon?  I still get some traffic on these kinds of lenses, but no more than 10-20 a week.

So think about your buyer. Do a simulated run of buying it on Amazon yourself. Is it an item lots of people know the name of? Are the Amazon reviews informative, and the product page tells you everything you need? Does the Amazon listing turn up at the top of Google when you search for it on Google? In that case, you probably won't have much luck, because the typical buyer is going to go to Google > Amazon > Amazon reviews > Buy as opposed to Google >Webpage  Review > Amazon > Buy.

That doesn't mean don't do the review, because you might get lucky. However, for the most part, I recommend focusing on products that fit the criteria I mentioned above: they solve a problem, answer a question, are difficult to find, or are sought by collectors. Those get searched on Google, not just Amazon, and users may actually do a little research before heading to Amazon.

The Buyer's Guide

Often, web users trying to compare a bunch of products to pick the best one. Then they need a concierge to steer them to likely products. These articles take more knowledge and experience to write well, because you can't get away with reviewing just one product: you have to be familiar with the niche and give an honestly useful report and comparison of a bunch of different products. But these articles can be very useful to customers, because they can't just go to Amazon and read a few reviews to find what they're looking for.

I make a few sales a day on these lenses: Best Books on Greek Mythology, Great Books on Celtic Mythology, Best Books on Egyptian Mythology. I had discovered these kinds of searches in my old Greece-related lenses' traffic stats. On the same principle, I tried the Best Ice Compresses and got good results.  So if you know a subject, and you've done your own comparison shopping to figure out which are the best, write a lens on it, with mini-reviews of the pros and cons of each and comments about what each one is good for.

I've also had tremendous luck with collectibles guides where I showcase all the items in a collection. People don't always buy those things, but they often go to Amazon to browse them, then they buy something— not necessarily any of those items, but those items lured them into the store like a shop window display!

The key with buyer's guides is that you're trying to attract people who are interested in a certain type of thing, they don't know exactly what product name to type into Amazon to find it. This kind of buyer's guide is especially effective for products that turn up a lot of four-to-five star rated products in Amazon search, so many that it would be bewildering and time-consuming to dig through all the customer reviews to find the best one (e.g. celtic mythology). If a search for, say, "eco-friendly Christmas lights" turns up only 5 products that are better than 3-star-ratings, then you're probably not going to get too many visitors to a webpage on that product; it's easier for visitors to skim those five products on Amazon, read the reviews there and make a choice. Again, this isn't an argument not to write such a review, but it's less likely to succeed. This problem is happening more and more, as apps and online retailers provide people many ways other than a generic Google search to learn all they need to know before making a purchase!

Here's a special case of the buyer's guide which is worth considering.

App Store Concierge

Right now, there's no easy way to SELL apps -- at least, I'm not finding an affiliate program with Apple that gets down to the app level -- unless you go for the Android apps available on Amazon. [EDIT: See below; Christene's got tips.] But since Squidoo rewards lenses that get lots of clickouts, there's an opportunity to make some money playing app concierge. There's a real opportunity here, at least for now, because the iTunes App Store isn't really good at turning up items unless you know the name of the app you're looking for. It's got no tags, too few categories, and only shows the top 100 in each category. It's a really inefficient way to find apps. For example, I couldn't really find an app that let me keep track of miles and calories for a treadmill, exercise bike, etc, because Apple's search tool is too inefficient.

So I'm creating a few guides to different kinds of apps. Right now I've got one on creative people's drawing apps, although I put that on Hubpages because I'm trying to diversify.

Basically, if you've had to do some research on, "What's the best app to do X?" make a lens about it, and be sure to make prominent links to the app's page.

Posted in: Conversion.
Tagged: · · ·

Backlink Seekers Target Squidoo For Pagerank

May 6th, 2012
by Greekgeek.
7 comments

Pagerank is a measurement Google came up with in the late 1990s to help it decided how highly to rank webpages, based on which webpages linked to that page (backlinks) and which pages it linked to. Nowadays, Pagerank is only one of 200+ factors that Google uses to decide how high up to list a webpage in its search results. Google has come up with many ways to detect relevance to a particular search query, making Pagerank somewhat obsolete. (See this post by Google spokespundit Matt Cutts for an explanation of Pagerank). Nevertheless, many old-time backlinkers are convinced that Pagerank is still the number one factor in making webpages rank well in Google, so they keep trying to find webpages with pagerank on which to plant backlinks.

Squidoo is a target for these pagerank-seekers. It's six years old, and many of its older articles have good pagerank. (Many of my older lenses are pagerank 3 to 5, which isn't bad).

Squidoo is a web 2.0 website with multiple opportunities for visitors to leave links: guestbooks and link plexos and duels. If you leave a guestbook or link plexo unmoderated -- and even if you don't -- link spammers will hit your lenses, trying to exploit your pagerank to boost their own rankings. Linkspam is not harmless. If your webpage links to poor neighborhoods, to sites that engage in shady linking practices, or to a lot of non-relevant content, those links could lower the quality, trustworthiness and relevance of your article in Google's eyes.

Link spam has always been a problem on Squidoo, but two events within the past year have made it more of a target. First, it has been largely unaffected by Google's Panda algorithm updates, which demoted a huge number of other websites. Second, on March 19, 2012, Google did a major algorithm tweak which de-indexed (removed from Google results) a batch of paid blog networks and other websites whose sole purpose was to publish thin, computer-generated content which appeared to be real articles, and which contained links to sites that paid them to feature those links. People were paying linkbuilding services to create backlinks for them in this way. Now, suddenly, those backlink sites are worthless, and some paid linkbuilding services like "BuildMyRank" have actually shut down.

All the sites which those backlinks pointed to have now lost standing in Google search results.  They're now searching for new places to plant backlinks in order to replace those they lost. Any blog, guestbook, or "submit your links here" widget is a target, especially on websites that still have some pagerank.

These link droppers are getting ever more clever about trying to disguise what they're doing so that you let their link through. Today I deleted two comments left on this blog saying it was a very well-written blog, asking me if I coded it from scratch, or saying that the person liked my blog so much he tweeted it to all his followers. It sounded like real humans had written these comments. However, the generic reference to "your blog" without any reference to the subject matter of the blog was a dead giveaway that they were cut-and-paste comments being dropped on any old blog. Their usernames included backlinks to their websites. They were using not only flattery, but one of the "six persuaders":  reciprocity. If someone does something for you, it's human nature to feel you should return the favor in some fashion. (The "I tweeted this to all my followers" ploy, which I've seen on several link drops lately).

I've also received a flood of emails from people offering to pay me to put a link to their sites on my lenses.

Don't be fooled. Google just dropped or demoted a whole bunch of domains these link droppers used to try and make their own sites rank better. You don't want your blog, lens or website to be showcasing links to the very people Google just penalized for shady backlinking practices and shallow content. Your lens could get hit by the same algorithm filter that demoted the sites they were using for backlinks before.

Your sole criteria for allowing a link onto your page should be the benefit it gives your readers. Is the site it links to useful, helpful, interesting, and strongly relevant to your subject matter? Will your readers be interested in it? Then approve it. Is it off-topic, or would readers who clicked on it be disappointed? Reject it.

By making sure your lenses only link to good, relevant content that is useful to your readers, you'll not only make that particular article looks good to Google. You'll help keep Squidoo from looking like "a place for spammers post their links."  By keeping our own lenses spam-free, we ensure that Squidoo continues to be ranked well by Google and doesn't get hit with a Panda penalty (which would cause a traffic drop for all pages on Squidoo).

Posted in: Basic SEO.
Tagged: · · ·

The Long Tail in the Age of Semantic SEO

Apr 29th, 2012
by Greekgeek.
2 comments

I recently did a long tail experiment to catch a few different search phrases.

See my introduction to the long tail, The New Long Tail of SEO, if you don't know what I mean by that term.

Okay. Here's the story.

(more...)

Posted in: Basic SEO.
Tagged: · · ·

Beyond Squidoo: Getting My Eggs in Multiple Baskets

Apr 19th, 2012
by Greekgeek.
11 comments

It's wise to get eggs in multiple baskets -- that is, income streams from multiple online sources -- to protect oneself against Google penalties or policy changes on any one site. Whereas last year I decided to make a go of treating Squidoo as a full-time job, this year I'm trying to diversify.

So far, I'm having a hard time getting traction anywhere else, but then, it takes a while to discover what works best with each service and website. Here's my breakdown for January-April 2012:

 

My Earnings Breakdown: Squidoo, Hubpages, etc

Here's what I've been doing lately.

(more...)

Posted in: My Stuff.
Tagged: · · ·

Are Cross-Links About to Get Google-Punched?

Apr 9th, 2012
by Greekgeek.
2 comments

Uh oh. Remember how I noticed the murmurs about content farm penalties back in January 2011, and got scoffed at for suggesting Google was going to be unrolling domain-based rather than single-page-based penalties?

Weeeell, I don't like the sound of this. Something in seoMOZ's whiteboard Friday vid this week caught my eye:

Here's the part that concerns me:

We've particularly seen this in the past few weeks with Google cracking down on linked networks, low quality links. They announced that they are going to be devaluing more administrative links. By administrative links, we mean sites that are related to each other. So if you own a network of 50 sites and you're interlinking all of those to each other, the value that you are getting is over-optimizing. They are going to be diminished, and you could face a penalty. If you do it too much, you could face de-indexing, like we've seen Google do with the linking indexes.

I cannot find the source for this: where has Google announced it's about to crack down on administrative links (cross-links between our own content on different sites)? But actually, it makes sense that Google would treat links we build to our own content as less value-passing than links other people have built, since self-promotion is not the same as third party recommendation. Furthermore, since Google (and Bing) define webspam as artificial practices designed to boost ranking in search engines, it will crack down on any linking practices -- such as building a whole bunch of websites and cross-linking them to simulate backlinks -- that are designed primarily for that purpose.

Once again, there's one thing that worries me, and one thing that doesn't.

I don't care if Google decides to treat those links as less important. Many people think that Google ignoring signals it used to give more weight to is a penalty, and the effect can be catastrophic if you relied too heavily on them.

But there is a difference between "Google starts ignoring X..." and "Google starts penalizing X." I may do things that Google pretty much ignores: they could be of benefit to my readers. What I try to avoid is things that I believe Google may actively penalize. (For example, since Google is on the record for penalizing paid links, I do not use Redgage, even though it may be perfectly safe).

I'm not saying I'm going to stop cross-linking my sites, articles and content: that would be a silly knee-jerk reaction, and I'm still not entirely sure what Cyrus Shepherd's possible "administrative link penalties" will entail. After all, prior to Panda, the punditsphere was full of people predicting the demise of "Content Farms," expecting Google to create some sort of blacklist of user-generated sites like Blekko did, and just penalizing those. In fact, Panda worked in an entirely different way. So we don't yet know what form Google's announcement will take when it's implemented. (WHERE is this announcement?) But it's time to brace, just in case.

To avoid possible algorithm tweaks in the future, it may be time to reconsider whether our cross-links are for our readers' benefit or for ours.

If this "administrative linking" algorithm adjustment materializes and is confirmed from reputable sources, I'm going to watch my author-linked content closely compared to my alternate pen name content which is not linked to my real name, "Greekgeek" pseudonym or Google profile. It will be interesting to see whether the network of blogs, articles and content Google associates under my authorname drops in rankings while the stuff associated with no particular author name (and thus missing the authorship benefit) stays unchanged.

I also want to leave you with a word of wisdom picked up from a guest interview at seoBook (I do not necessarily endorse most of what Aaron Wall says, and I am a "useful/exceptional content and on-page optimization" advocate rather than a professional backlinker like Jim Boykin, but still):

SeoBook: Google recently nailed a bunch of lower quality bulk link networks. Were you surprised these lasted as long as they did? Was the fact that they worked at all an indication of the sustained importance of links?

Boykin: Well...surprised...no... filtering out networks is something that's always going to happen....once something gets too big, or too popular, or too talked about...then it's in danger of being burned... the popular "short cuts" of today are the popular penalized networks of tomorrow.

Emphasis mine. They're talking about BuildMyRank and other link/blog networks getting deep sixed by a recent Google penalty, but the wider message is a Google variant of Tall Poppy Syndrome: various tricks will work for a while to draw traffic, boost lensrank, or succeed in any sphere where success is measured by a computer algorithm, but once a particular strategy for gaming the system becomes popular, then, sooner or later, the algorithm maker will notice and attempt to thwart the tactic. (And the collateral damage is sometimes more devastating to innocent bystanders than those the algorithm tweak is meant to thwart.)

Posted in: Thinky Thoughts.
Tagged: · ·

Lens Updating Tip: A Google Spot Check

Apr 8th, 2012
by Greekgeek.
4 comments

Keeping 400 lenses reasonably updated is serious business. We can do a quick scan for broken images, links and videos, but here's a meaningful update you can do in five minutes: a quick tweak that can improve traffic to a lens.

  1. Click "Stats" under the lens name.
  2. Click the "Traffic" tab.
  3. Change the "Date Range" pulldown menu to 90 days.
  4. Look at the "Keywords" chart that shows what searches have brought people to the lens. Figure out which is the top keyword phrase (often combining a couple different variants from the list). For instance, here I tried "wooden rack oven puller," whose words include a few of the other top searches:
     





  5.  Do a Google search for that phrase and turn OFF personalized search results (which are tailored to your own web browsing habits) by clicking the globe button at upper right:





  6. Look closely at the blurb / description. This is what the majority of people searching for your lens will see. Is it as good as it could be? Or is there something you could do to add a Call to Action, encourage people to click on the link (see How to Get More Clicks, Sales)?

    In this example, it's a "how to make your own X" page, which is very obvious from the lens title and link. In fact, the page is also a "where to buy X because you're too lazy to make it" article! But the blurb gives no indication that I've included "where to buy" as well as "how to make" information. Therefore, I improve that sentence very slightly, taking care not to disturb the keyword search phrase (or popular variants):

    It's a clumsy tweak, but now the blurb should attract buyers as well as DIYers.

  7. Ping it with the ping tool added to the lens workshop's sidebar by SquidUtil's workshop add-on.

The wording of your blurb depends on (a) your goals for the article (sell something, inform people of something, get them to click on a free download button, get them to visit your website -- to name a few) and (b) what your audience is looking for. Make sure your page has what they're looking for, then make sure your blurb tells them you have what they're looking for!

The above steps can be done fairly quickly: (1) check traffic stats (2) search the top phrase(s) and see what the blurb looks like (3) edit your lens in that spot to make sure the wording is as good as possible.

Over time, this may be a simple but effective way to boost traffic to the lens.

Posted in: Squidoo Tips.
Tagged: ·

On Pinterest and Copyright Concerns (Yes, That Again)

Feb 15th, 2012
by Greekgeek.
1 comment

I wrote an article called "Is Pinterest a Haven for Copyright Violations?"  that covered the hidden catches buried in Pinterest's Terms of Use. The article went viral, and a firestorm ignited on Twitter when my article and two others on Pinterest and copyright came out at about the same time (search "Pinterest copyright" on Twitter).

Apparently what I said resonated with many. The comments I received on both sides of the argument are worth reading. That was actually my intention in writing it:  I wanted to present one side of the story as clearly as possible, and was hoping for the debate that followed.

On a tangent, the "how to" side of things:  this is only the second time I've had an article go viral. In both cases, I tapped into an issue that a lot of people cared passionately about, and which was rising in popularity.  In both cases I used a Magnetic Headline posing the topic as a question designed to provoke an emotional response. I didn't know it would go viral, but just in case it did draw traffic, I posted it on Hubpages which pays better for individual impressions than Squidoo does. (I think Squidoo is better for pages that people click links on and/or buy things from.) Hubpages also has a cleaner, more professional-looking skin for a reader unfamiliar with the site, which I find makes a difference in op-ed and informational articles.

However, I didn't post the article just to get traffic. I posted it to deliver important information on an issue I care about. I was terrified that I'd be virtually tarred and feathered, but I was gratified to find some people in the comments making my points better than I could make them myself. Of course, many commenters argued the other side of the debate, and some of them had important things to say, too. I urge you to read it, and them.

Posted in: Thinky Thoughts.
Tagged: · · ·

← Earlier Posts