Squidoo Web Companions

Websites and Blogs with Companion Squidoo Lenses

Answering Gil’s Annoyed Comment: Kill all the Spammers?

Do I detect a wee bit of exhaustion on this topic? More than a little? A “if I keep hearing this I’ll soon want to kill myself” exhaustion?; a ‘don’t you know that I’ve done EVERYTHING I can think of, cooperated in every conceivable way to keep spam from taking us down’ kind of exhaustion?

Seth has spoken out on this, Megan has made it clear, Gil has worked 24/7 PLUS nights*, EVEN during a bout with food poisoning, to make Squidoo great AND keep the spam down; and honestly NONE of us have control over how the rest of the world sees Squidoo. We have Kimberly, a wonderful educator and cheerleader for Squidoo, who keeps the optimism and enthusiasm high, youthful, and energetic. We have committed and involved lensmasters blogging, writing, and helping.

We’ve got Squid Angels, filters, star rankings, banning functions, and community policing of spam to work the internals of Squidoo; we’re all using all the tools, and still the reputation of Squidoo is suffering.

All of us are committed, all of us working hard, all of us doing everything possible to stay on top of this and keep Squidoo on the trajectory that will make it fulfill its destiny as the great asset it is and will be to the internet, and to be positioned to be ready for the HUGE explosion of growth that is also beyond our control but clearly on the way. To work through this DIP.

Even Google doesn’t kill the spammers, though if anyone could get away with such a thing, it might be them. In fact, much of the spam the internet suffers from is actually generated from Google’s own policies and tools it gives out to people publicly- if Google gives it out, it MUST be good to really use, and aggressively as possible!

Google ‘sinks’ spam, Squidoo ‘sinks’ spam. Google deletes spam accounts, Squidoo deletes spam accounts. Google provides great tools, Squidoo provides great tools. Google doesn’t suffer, Squidoo suffers.

The problem ISN’T Squidoo- its the abusers of Squidoo who are moving out from Squidoo and flooding OTHER sites with the crummiest lenses we have, 2.0 sites who should normally have a wonderful symbiotic relationship with Squidoo, but instead, because of this, they finally decide to avoid us, to ban us completely.

It is possible to do everything right, and still have things go wrong that shouldn’t go wrong.

So, Squidooer’s are trying. We’re trying off-site things like lensroll.com, to give lensmasters a great and participatory way to get excellent off-site links. Spammy pages get deleted from there too.

Blogging- we’re blogging about how to squidoo, how to do GREAT squidoo, how to build up charitable squidoo…

Education. Squidooer’s have made free information and help pages that have more information, and better information, about every conceivable aspect of great squidooing- NOBODY needs to spend a NICKEL to learn how to Squidoo. We volunteer to help each other and newbies- nobody in the lounge that is a Citizen Squid or contributor is getting a penny for helping people out that way.

Grouping- we’re gathering the best stuff on squidoo into tribes, groups, same interest communities.

Once again, THE PROBLEM ISN’T SQUIDOO.

Possible solutions?

Perhaps an agreement with our friends in other 2.0 sites to bounce back spam submissions to Squidoo for a penalty. We have HUGE numbers of wonderful and worthy pages that would enhance these other communities. Those aren’t even given their chance to help Squidoo show its best face because of this.

Web 2.0 leaders having a discussion with Google. Their policies of having HUGE NUMBERS of backlinks, regardless of authority or quality, is one of the most essential factors in the drive to spam any and every site a person can get into. We may need to wait for the additional link filtering of web 3.0 for this to be effected, but as ‘on top’ of things as Google is, and as accessible as Matt Cutts is, I don’t see why that change can’t be implemented BEFORE the 2.0 REALLY explodes.

Web 2.0 leaders having a discussion with ‘seo junk’ promotion leaders and influencers. Perhaps a out-and-out face to face talk with these people would make a difference. It would give these 2.0 sites a chance to give them opportunities to access and use all those sites rightly, and perhaps influence their considerable audiences to more productive activities.

Web 2.0 sites are ALSO a part of our community: a community OF communities. Time for the neighbors to work together to get things in order and comfortable working these things out.

Anyone else have any suggestions? Put them here!

Advertisements

3 comments on “Answering Gil’s Annoyed Comment: Kill all the Spammers?

  1. mrlewissmile
    May 9, 2008

    …..what comment?

  2. Margaret
    May 9, 2008

    The post below- needed more space as he asked for solutions.

  3. Kimberly at Squidoo
    May 11, 2008

    Great points, everyone! Labels can be fierce. It’s too bad we have to blame an entire company instead of the few people who need a severe time out. I know our staff and lensmasters work very hard to be the best they can be!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Information

This entry was posted on May 9, 2008 by in Spam Issues and tagged , , , , , , , .
%d bloggers like this: