Comments on: Flattery Bots: The New Paid Blog Networks?

By: AA

AA — Tue, 05 Jun 2012 11:46:17 +0000

I am pretty new to both Squidoo and HubPages, I really like the format of Squidoo lenses, but I’ve written more on HubPages, simply because the pay system seems a lot more transparent, you get traffic, you get paid.

Not that HubPages is immune to the curse of the mass cheesy fake comments, there was a recent forum thread about this, where it was claimed that hubbers are involved in huge Facebook mutual admiration societies where they all follow each other and leave glowing comments on each others’ hubs (which are sometimes truly bad).

I dislike this aspect of trying to write online the most, especially with the revenue sharing websites, the necessity to have lots of ‘followers’ on HubPages and social media sites. I’m hoping it is possible to succeed without it, it will just take longer.

By: Greekgeek

Greekgeek — Fri, 01 Jun 2012 02:49:57 +0000

10K? Ouch. Put some clickout bait on that sucker, stat!

Speaking of gaming the system. *sigh*

By: Greekgeek

Greekgeek — Fri, 01 Jun 2012 02:48:54 +0000

Ack, you may be right. That hadn’t occurred to me, but it would probably be fairly easy to do.

By: AJ

AJ — Mon, 28 May 2012 21:05:55 +0000

Picking up on what Heather says, from what I have seen I believe Squidoo’s algorithm is so biased towards internal Squidoo traffic and likes that it makes it so much easier to game the system at the expense of those of us who try to do things in a more honest fashion.

“Dishonest traffic” is what I call it, because of the gaming and false reciprocation that goes on and this at the expense of anyone getting “honest traffic” as in Google traffic as the result of good keywords and unique, useful content.

However, the fast likings and visiting that go on in Squidoo may not necessarily be “bots” – I am trying to master some Macro Writing and I do wonder if it is macros that some people are using to “speed-like” on Squidoo.

I think I have more or less worked out how it can be done and it is using Macros that clone mouse movements and clicks. These mouse movements can click on specific areas of a screen, so you could run the macro on a Top 100 list in any topic and it will replicate all the button clicks and insert exactly the same text in goodness how many Guestbooks.

I bet the people running the macros really do not have a clue exactly which lenses they are visiting and liking.

By: Flynn

Flynn — Mon, 28 May 2012 20:32:23 +0000

Argh, this! Yes, I’ve been getting them too. My policy, if I’m not sure enough to delete, is to go to the lens after a few days and just ‘weed’ the guestbook. If it was genuine, then it wasn’t culled out of hand, but there’s no reason it should clutter up my lens if it adds nothing.

By: Heather426

Heather426 — Mon, 28 May 2012 18:06:11 +0000

I think that some of the people who complained might also be using bots. Doing the math on their blessings and likes, they seem suspicious too. Just my opinion, but there it is. I think Squidoo’s algorithm needs changing. it’s too easy to game. For example I have lenses that get almost 10,000 visits a month and are not in first tier, but some people who bless and visit a lot and get 800 visits per month per lens still manage to keep them all in the first tier. Something is really wrong with that!!!