Spinning content for link building

[eventdomain]

You've obviously never tried this technique. It work's a dream.

1. You'd be surprised what I've tired, what I own or have operated in web-based tools, websites, databases etc etc etc. But sometimes things are so obviously a bad idea, that common sense must prevail against temptation, and that's the best tool in the world

Hasn't anyone worked it out yet - this is just another tool that makes it easier to knock out worthless articles that noone will read. A nice $77 dollars for the owner, while you lose it and waste time writing articles noone will ever read

2. There's no quick fix/route to decent results on this web.

 

[JohnnyCash]

1. You'd be surprised what I've tired, what I own or have operated in web-based tools, websites, databases etc etc etc. But sometimes things are so obviously a bad idea, that common sense must prevail against temptation, and that's the best tool in the world

Well twice in the last 2 days, on completely separate subjects, you've decided to start handing out advice on topics you have absolutely no clue about. I've not read any of your old posts, is that your usual MO?

Hasn't anyone worked it out yet - this is just another tool that makes it easier to knock out worthless articles that noone will read. A nice $77 dollars for the owner, while you lose it and waste time writing articles noone will ever read

Who cares if nobody reads them? They're for search engine spiders, not people. And you don't need to pay $77, I posted one you can use for free.

 

[ORDERED WEB]

The spun content won't be on my site. It'll be on 3rd party sites. If you do manage to land on a spun article and click away, I don't care because I've not lost anything - you wouldn't have landed on my site anyway.

So basically, you are happy to use the resources of others... but you dont care because you are not using up your own resources

In most instances, 1000 spun articles WILL beat your competitors, if you place them in suitable places with links back to your main site on them.
Only if you are in a very uncompetitive market

Its neither a waste of time or resources, because the return on my investment in both is high - its worth doing. To say its "disrespectful" is a bit of an over reaction! Its hardly up there with burning Korans is it?
Disrespectful, is filling up other peoples servers full of rubbish, ignoring the time an effort that surfers take up when they are really looking for something to find they endlessly have to click back on the browser because they have found yet another poor article.

You say it is worth doing... actually what is worth doing is investing yoru time and writing 1000 unique and useful articles. That wil benefit you, and benefit the end user

Time and budget is the whole point of doing it in the first place - its faster and cheaper to spin 1000 articles for link building, than it is to pay someone to create them the old fashioned away
I see this is the case, but you shift the burden of effort from yoruself, to the end user

I don't agree that its not as rewarding as other link building methods, as they all go hand in hand - if I pay someone to host a page of content, then I'm going to need to give them the content, so I just pull one from the spun content pile.
Rewarding to me would be seeing visitors with a wide range long tail searches landing on my site, because I provided them excellent content

I would far rather have 100 spun articles on 3rd party sites, linking back to me, than the 100 articles on my own site. Although they're textually unique, they all say exactly the same thing. There would be very little reason to have them all on your own site, and you'd have very little excuse for it if someone realised you'd done it
So you know really it is wrong, you are simply pushing your luck, and seeing how far you can go without being penalised> As long as it isnt on your server, you should be OK, the fact that the chap with the other server might take a hit is neither here nor there to you

If someone spams and nobody is there to see it, is it really spam?
Spam is spam, and yes people see it, and then click back. In addition to that.. If google need to put in 40% more servers to crawl through the crap, then what you are doing is really costing another company (Google). You are also costing the employers of peoplke whose jobs it is to tresearch things> When you do research things online, it becomes pretty evident that you have to wade through a tide of rubbish to find the gem. Most of that tide of rubbish is there to manipulate search engines. The Gem is aimed at a human

Nobody is going to see all this junk anyway, the effect it has on anyone else is negligible.
See above

___

By spining content, you must philosophically register that content is important. Where we differ is that for me content is for humans first. For you, content is just a tool or resourse to drag people to your website, a way of artificially moving you up the search rankings higher than you deserver to be, because the site in question either lacks content or real authoritory. For me, the resources of others are as important as my own resources

I am not saying that you should totally ignore optimising content for search engines, it is just for me this shouldn't be to the detriment of optimising it for a human

When you pay a hosting bill or a server bill, you realise that the internet really isnt free - the servers, the infrastructure, the bandwidth is all paid for by soemone one way or the other

Spun content may help you initially, but like all other black hat techniques - google have a answer for it

- bounce rate

 

[DesignerNick]

1. You'd be surprised what I've tired, what I own or have operated in web-based tools, websites, databases etc etc etc. But sometimes things are so obviously a bad idea, that common sense must prevail against temptation, and that's the best tool in the world

Hasn't anyone worked it out yet - this is just another tool that makes it easier to knock out worthless articles that noone will read. A nice $77 dollars for the owner, while you lose it and waste time writing articles noone will ever read

2. There's no quick fix/route to decent results on this web.

It is 77 dollars that I have made back many times over

Again, you try to teach your granny how to suck eggs!

I have a website that I used this tool on, it gets traffic in a month that you get in a year? Worthless?

 

[RadiusBPO]

I don't understand why people think SEO is either Great content or Spam (Someone Positioned Above Me?). Can't you have great content targeting 100s of long tail phrases and use automated link building to help these pages rank?

 

[terryuk]

A side from spinning content for mass generated pages, there are other ways you can add some value to the page, e.g Google Maps, backlink to relevant websites/pages, and various other free widget tools or snippets to grab pieces of information..

Look at http://informe.com/, I've started seeing this site across the board and that is nothing more than a few bots at work.

 

[JohnnyCash]

The spun content won't be on my site. It'll be on 3rd party sites. If you do manage to land on a spun article and click away, I don't care because I've not lost anything - you wouldn't have landed on my site anyway.

So basically, you are happy to use the resources of others... but you dont care because you are not using up your own resources

Places like ezine articles want you to spam them up - they're relying on you to do it so that they get random long tail traffic that will click on their ads.

If you're paying blog owners to host the content, you're not wasting the resources - you're buying them.

In most instances, 1000 spun articles WILL beat your competitors, if you place them in suitable places with links back to your main site on them.
Only if you are in a very uncompetitive market

Not true at all. If you have a reasonable site already, 1000 backlinks pointing to a new section of a website you've added is almost certainly going to rank it.

Its neither a waste of time or resources, because the return on my investment in both is high - its worth doing. To say its "disrespectful" is a bit of an over reaction! Its hardly up there with burning Korans is it?
Disrespectful, is filling up other peoples servers full of rubbish, ignoring the time an effort that surfers take up when they are really looking for something to find they endlessly have to click back on the browser because they have found yet another poor article.

Any damage I do by people accidently seeing these garbage posts, I more than make up for by using them to rank really awesome sites with

You say it is worth doing... actually what is worth doing is investing yoru time and writing 1000 unique and useful articles. That wil benefit you, and benefit the end user

Please explain to me exactly how this benefits me, and you not liking spam, or wasting other peoples time, isn't a valid answer. Spinning 1000 articles saves me $4000 and a lot of time and effort. You've not given me a single good reason that benefits *me* not to do it.

Time and budget is the whole point of doing it in the first place - its faster and cheaper to spin 1000 articles for link building, than it is to pay someone to create them the old fashioned away
I see this is the case, but you shift the burden of effort from yoruself, to the end user

Thats cool, for my lead gen sites I'm fine with that. I need to eat.

I don't agree that its not as rewarding as other link building methods, as they all go hand in hand - if I pay someone to host a page of content, then I'm going to need to give them the content, so I just pull one from the spun content pile.
Rewarding to me would be seeing visitors with a wide range long tail searches landing on my site, because I provided them excellent content

Excellent content isn't enough - without backlinks pointing to it, nobody is going to see it...

I would far rather have 100 spun articles on 3rd party sites, linking back to me, than the 100 articles on my own site. Although they're textually unique, they all say exactly the same thing. There would be very little reason to have them all on your own site, and you'd have very little excuse for it if someone realised you'd done it
So you know really it is wrong, you are simply pushing your luck, and seeing how far you can go without being penalised> As long as it isnt on your server, you should be OK, the fact that the chap with the other server might take a hit is neither here nor there to you

I didn't say its wrong did I? Nobody else is going to get penalised for hosting it either, thats just silly to even suggest that.

If someone spams and nobody is there to see it, is it really spam?
Spam is spam, and yes people see it, and then click back. In addition to that.. If google need to put in 40% more servers to crawl through the crap, then what you are doing is really costing another company (Google). You are also costing the employers of peoplke whose jobs it is to tresearch things> When you do research things online, it becomes pretty evident that you have to wade through a tide of rubbish to find the gem. Most of that tide of rubbish is there to manipulate search engines. The Gem is aimed at a human

Google are happy with spam and nonsense, do you think things like Mahalo and eHow wouldn't be allowed to rank otherwise? If you monetize your garbage in the end with adsense, Google are cashing in too.

For you, content is just a tool or resourse to drag people to your website, a way of artificially moving you up the search rankings higher than you deserver to be, because the site in question either lacks content or real authoritory.

Now you're just making assumptions. Again, I could have the best content on my topic in the world, but without backlinks nobody gets to see it. But you are right on one part, yes I see low quality content purely as a tool to rank my own sites. Nothing wrong with that.

For me, the resources of others are as important as my own resources

Thats the kind of attitude that will keep you poor. Nothing wrong with that as such, if you're happy always coming 2nd to someone else and them making more than you, thats fine.

 

[DesignerNick]

I think again people are commenting on things they have never tried or don't know much about

It is hardly spamming other peoples hosting is it? They want these articles to generate them long tails to make money from ads?

 

[DesignerNick]

The spun content won't be on my site. It'll be on 3rd party sites. If you do manage to land on a spun article and click away, I don't care because I've not lost anything - you wouldn't have landed on my site anyway.

So basically, you are happy to use the resources of others... but you dont care because you are not using up your own resources

If people decide they want to make article directories, they have to accept people will be using their site for their own gain (SEO, Backlinks). The article sites like the long tail traffic, they get ad clicks. Do you think people make the article directories out of boredom?

Its neither a waste of time or resources, because the return on my investment in both is high - its worth doing. To say its "disrespectful" is a bit of an over reaction! Its hardly up there with burning Korans is it?
Disrespectful, is filling up other peoples servers full of rubbish, ignoring the time an effort that surfers take up when they are really looking for something to find they endlessly have to click back on the browser because they have found yet another poor article.

It is hardly rubbish. The Best Spinner is used to make sure that the articles are still using Decent English, make sense and are still informative. It is not like it is posting a list of keywords?

I don't agree that its not as rewarding as other link building methods, as they all go hand in hand - if I pay someone to host a page of content, then I'm going to need to give them the content, so I just pull one from the spun content pile.
Rewarding to me would be seeing visitors with a wide range long tail searches landing on my site, because I provided them excellent content

Does it matter if you are a copyrighting expert or have a degree in the subject the article / page is about? At the end of the day it is there to get you traffic, to get people onto your site and then hit them with the call to action.

I would far rather have 100 spun articles on 3rd party sites, linking back to me, than the 100 articles on my own site. Although they're textually unique, they all say exactly the same thing. There would be very little reason to have them all on your own site, and you'd have very little excuse for it if someone realised you'd done it
So you know really it is wrong, you are simply pushing your luck, and seeing how far you can go without being penalised> As long as it isnt on your server, you should be OK, the fact that the chap with the other server might take a hit is neither here nor there to you

The chap has an article website, it is made to have articles submitted to them? If they are in decent English and actually have a point to them then what is the problem? If bandwidth is an issue, he shouldn't run an article site?

By spining content, you must philosophically register that content is important. Where we differ is that for me content is for humans first

The Best Spinner is made so that it is still readable and makes sense, just unique. Have you ever used it?

Spun content may help you initially, but like all other black hat techniques - google have a answer for it

- bounce rate

I wouldn't really class content spinning as black hat.

The bounce rate isn't that important to some people. If they land on my blue widget page and click on an advert for a blue widget and leave my site then it makes me some money and they have bounced, but bounced making me money

 

[eventdomain]

Dont forget his number one seach engine in the world now that is some boast. No evidence to back it up though

yeah yeah yeah - but thanks for the free plug!

Every time Event Domain makes a claim that a method doesn't work, which a large number of us know DOES work

do you mean tools like that free advert toolbar TrafficG a few years back? So tell me, where is that toolbar now..... its dead mate, down with the dodos, yet it was said to be the greatest thing alive by the webmaster community.

If these ideas were so amazing, then surely the inventor would have made it far superior than whats on offer? And am pretty sure all these ideas will appeal to the desperate only. The sad thing is that such tools will be used to 'speed up' the spamming process.

Good luck in your spamming, I'm sure no important site or blog wants to know, and you'll end up annoying search engines who'll show their appreciation, I'm sure - probably by punishing your ass, which will hopefully cost you big time.

 

[ORDERED WEB]

I think again people are commenting on things they have never tried or don't know much about

It is hardly spamming other peoples hosting is it? They want these articles to generate them long tails to make money from ads?

Lets think about this

You post an article on website designed for spammy articles, which is a pile of crap

The user who is searching out of desparation then clicks on a advert, because that actually looks like it might be of some help.

The owner of the spammy article site makes money out of this, So does google. Ypu get yourself a juicy backlink

The person who really looses out is the owner of the site paying for the advert (because by rights they probrably should have been in a decent organic position), the second person that looses is the surfer, who gets hacked off going round in circles looking for whatever it is they are searching for

 

[ORDERED WEB]

The bounce rate isn't that important to some people. If they land on my blue widget page and click on an advert for a blue widget and leave my site then it makes me some money and they have bounced, but bounced making me money

Google measures the bounce rate! Think on that

 

[JohnnyCash]

Google measures the bounce rate! Think on that

Google can't put too much weight on the bounce rate, because dependent on what you're doing, a high bounce rate might actually be a sign of quality.

What they can do is check whether you went straight back to Google and searched for something else similar, that wouldn't be good for you. But if they landed on an article site, who cares? The black mark goes against them, not you.

 

[DesignerNick]

Lets think about this

You post an article on website designed for spammy articles, which is a pile of crap

The user who is searching out of desparation then clicks on a advert, because that actually looks like it might be of some help.

The owner of the spammy article site makes money out of this, So does google. Ypu get yourself a juicy backlink

The person who really looses out is the owner of the site paying for the advert (because by rights they probrably should have been in a decent organic position), the second person that looses is the surfer, who gets hacked off going round in circles looking for whatever it is they are searching for

So if a spammy article website is sitting at the top of google then surely the competitors are doing something wrong for being outranked by content you say won't rank?

 

[eventdomain]

Disrespectful, is filling up other peoples servers full of rubbish, ignoring the time an effort that surfers take up when they are really looking for something to find they endlessly have to click back on the browser because they have found yet another poor article.

Exactly, why do people risk annoying the searcher with another spam article, this is not a good thing.

landing on my site, because I provided them excellent content

Yep, how many times has Quality won over quantity - the visitor decides what they like, and if they view some poor article, this must drive them away from your site.

 

[JohnnyCash]

Yet again, a display of a complete lack of understanding of what is being discussed...

Exactly, why do people risk annoying the searcher with another spam article, this is not a good thing.

If they somehow land on one of these spun articles, they're not even going to associate it with your real site, so if you annoy them or bore them it really doesn't matter.

and if they view some poor article, this must drive them away from your site.

No, because if they view some poor article, they're on a site hosting a linking article, they're not even on your site to drive them away from it...

 

[ORDERED WEB]

What they can do is check whether you went straight back to Google and searched for something else similar, that wouldn't be good for you. But if they landed on an article site, who cares? The black mark goes against them, not you.

And what was the point of you putting the article on? - to gain rank from the article site. And if Google dont put any weight on your article, because it has a high bounce rate... you loose, because according to google the link is rubbish

So you save time now, but long term, you have to repeat your work, because google eventually demote the value of the link

 

[ORDERED WEB]

Yet again, a display of a complete lack of understanding of what is being discussed...

You keep saying this. We all understand what is being discussed, it is just we dont all happen to agree with your point of view

 

[RadiusBPO]

I don't normally like to mention SEOMOZ because I feel they contribute a lot to the disinformation we see posted everywhere but this is an interesting article which explains a lot of the opinions expressed in this thread - http://www.seomoz.org/ugc/be-skeptical-be-confident


What seems to be happening is people who haven't tested something are making massive sweeping statements that something is a bad idea and will never work but if it did you will likely get banned for doing it. And then there are people who use this technique frequently, test different methods and have proven results stating something does work.
Why don't the 1st group listen and alter their view? Maybe they don't care but then why express such strong opinions in the 1st place?


It has been said a few times in this thread that these articles hardly ever rank and certainly won't rank for the keywords you're targeting. The ones that do rank for long tail random keywords are helping the site owners (and Google) make money from the Adsense. What is so hard to understand?

 

[RadiusBPO]

And what was the point of you putting the article on? - to gain rank from the article site. And if Google dont put any weight on your article, because it has a high bounce rate... you loose, because according to google the link is rubbish

So you save time now, but long term, you have to repeat your work, because google eventually demote the value of the link

Does bounce rate effect ranking? I look after SEO for some sites on 1st page for what I consider fairly competitive but their bounce rates are 85-90%... Surely if bounce rate was a ranking factor they would have dropped?

 

[DesignerNick]

You keep saying this. We all understand what is being discussed, it is just we dont all happen to agree with your point of view

You are saying it wont work but havent tried it, Johnny is saying he has tried it and it does work?

Fair enough if you had tried it, it is the same as Event Domain and his affiliate marketing doesnt work claims!

You say these articles wont rank but then you are saying it isnt fair that people click on these articles in google?

 

[ORDERED WEB]

You are saying it wont work but havent tried it, Johnny is saying he has tried it and it does work?

Fair enough if you had tried it, it is the same as Event Domain and his affiliate marketing doesnt work claims!

At least you have twigged that in the many years we have been working online we might have tried it or at least we might have worked with companies that have tried it etc...

 

[cmcp]

Are you saying you have tried it or worked with others who have? Cause I don't believe you.

 

[JohnnyCash]

You keep saying this. We all understand what is being discussed, it is just we dont all happen to agree with your point of view

That comment was aimed at eventdomain, I should have put it after his quote instead of before.

I realise you understand what the issue is, partly. Eventdomain is on another planet as usual.

 

[OldWelshGuy]

yeah yeah yeah - but thanks for the free plug!



do you mean tools like that free advert toolbar TrafficG a few years back? So tell me, where is that toolbar now..... its dead mate, down with the dodos, yet it was said to be the greatest thing alive by the webmaster community.

If these ideas were so amazing, then surely the inventor would have made it far superior than whats on offer? And am pretty sure all these ideas will appeal to the desperate only. The sad thing is that such tools will be used to 'speed up' the spamming process.

Good luck in your spamming, I'm sure no important site or blog wants to know, and you'll end up annoying search engines who'll show their appreciation, I'm sure - probably by punishing your ass, which will hopefully cost you big time.

ED you make me giggle. Whenever you are pushed into a corner and proved wrong, you come up with straw man arguments.
NO i do not mean whatever piece of junk you are referring to right there, (As it was my quote that I am replying to, you quoted my reply to you.

I am talking about rewriting articles and sending a relatively unique legible article to different article sites/blogs.

I will state right now that it works, and, if associated work is also done, it works very well as a part of the overall scheme of things.

Now you can bleat and shout that it doesn't work as much as you like, but I think you should qualify that with the statement that YOU could not get it to work for you (assuming you tried it becaiuse I don't think anyone would state something doesn't work if they had no first hand experience of it failing to work.

SO assuming that you have tried this method and it is failed. Will you agree with the statement that it didn't work for you?

------------------------------------>

which of these is the original and which is spun?

"The Little Mermaid" is a fairy tale by the Danish poet and writer Hans Christian Andersen written about a young mermaid willing to give up her life in the water and her being as a mermaid to gain a human soul and the love of a human prince.
Written originally for ballet, the story was first published in 1837 and has been changed for various forms including musical theatre and animated film.
----------
"The Little Mermaid" is a fictional story by the Danish poet and author Hans Christian Andersen all about a child mermaid willing to trade her life in the sea and her being as a mermaid to obtain a human soul and the love of a human prince.
Written originally as a ballet, the story was first published in 1837 and has been re-written for many genre including musical theatre and animated film.
---------
"The Little Mermaid" is a fictional story by the Danish poet and author Hans Christian Andersen all about a child mermaid willing to trade her life in the sea and her being as a mermaid to obtain a human soul and the love of a human prince.
Written originally as a ballet, the story was first published in the late 1800's and has been adapted for many genre including musical theatre and animated film.
--------
"The Little Mermaid" is a fairy tale by the Danish poet and writer Hans Christian Andersen all about a child mermaid willing to trade her life in the water and her being as a mermaid to get a human soul and the love of a human prince.
Written originally for ballet, the tale was first published in the 19th century and has been re-jigged for various genre including musical theatre and animated film.
-------

Any thoughts? This is a couple of minutes of syntax, it is not perfect, and is not really spun enough. but it should give you an idea of output quality.

The article sites want unique content, if you can provide unique content that reads well, then everyone wins.

 

[DesignerNick]

Safe to say that none of the above looks spammy

I think again it is people not really knowing much about it.

 

[ORDERED WEB]

"The Little Mermaid" is a fairy tale by the Danish poet and writer Hans Christian Andersen written about a young mermaid willing to give up her life in the water and her being as a mermaid to gain a human soul and the love of a human prince.
Written originally for ballet, the story was first published in 1837 and has been changed for various forms including musical theatre and animated film.
----------
"The Little Mermaid" is a fictional story by the Danish poet and author Hans Christian Andersen all about a child mermaid willing to trade her life in the sea and her being as a mermaid to obtain a human soul and the love of a human prince.
Written originally as a ballet, the story was first published in 1837 and has been re-written for many genre including musical theatre and animated film.
---------
"The Little Mermaid" is a fictional story by the Danish poet and author Hans Christian Andersen all about a child mermaid willing to trade her life in the sea and her being as a mermaid to obtain a human soul and the love of a human prince.
Written originally as a ballet, the story was first published in the late 1800's and has been adapted for many genre including musical theatre and animated film.
--------
"The Little Mermaid" is a fairy tale by the Danish poet and writer Hans Christian Andersen all about a child mermaid willing to trade her life in the water and her being as a mermaid to get a human soul and the love of a human prince.
Written originally for ballet, the tale was first published in the 19th century and has been re-jigged for various genre including musical theatre and animated film.
-------

Sorry, if you are trying to convince us that this is a passable example of unique content you must be wrong

 

[OldWelshGuy]

Sorry, if you are trying to convince us that this is a passable example of unique content you must be wrong

So they are all the same then?

Please explain what you are saying.

I have made it quite clear what I have asked and the conditions. you OTOH have ignored the simple question, and put up a strawman argument.

Honestly sometimes on forums it is like juggling eels

 

[JohnnyCash]

Sorry, if you are trying to convince us that this is a passable example of unique content you must be wrong

Its probably not spun enough to pass Copyscape, but like he says it was only a few minutes work. "a human soul and the love of a human prince." , "including musical theatre and animated film." and "and her being as a mermaid to" stand out a little because they've obviously not been spun.

I think the parts that were spun in that example, show that it is obviously going to work if you spend time doing it properly.

 

[OldWelshGuy]

Its probably not spun enough to pass Copyscape, but like he says it was only a few minutes work. "a human soul and the love of a human prince." , "including musical theatre and animated film." and "and her being as a mermaid to" stand out a little because they've obviously not been spun.

I think the parts that were spun in that example, show that it is obviously going to work if you spend time doing it properly.

And that is my point. it is the old Computer addage of GIGO

 

[UKSBD]

Worth bearing in mind that an article on ezine and other articles sites won't rank in pages from UK.

That very same article on a UK based website can get you a number 1 ranking when doing a pages from UK search.

The same goes for Google.fr, de, etc.

And these articles don't even need spinning.

 

[ORDERED WEB]

So they are all the same then?

Please explain what you are saying.

I have made it quite clear what I have asked and the conditions. you OTOH have ignored the simple question, and put up a strawman argument.

Honestly sometimes on forums it is like juggling eels

I see what you are saying, it is just to my eye, they are so close that they really would be duplicate content. I am being careful as as we all well know I am not the ultimate arbiter of this

 

[DesignerNick]

Its probably not spun enough to pass Copyscape, but like he says it was only a few minutes work. "a human soul and the love of a human prince." , "including musical theatre and animated film." and "and her being as a mermaid to" stand out a little because they've obviously not been spun.

I think the parts that were spun in that example, show that it is obviously going to work if you spend time doing it properly.

That is the point, I am not sure what Place of Design and Event Domain think this does. I doubt if they looked at any of the properly spun articles they would be able to tell.

 

[DesignerNick]

I see what you are saying, it is just to my eye, they are so close that they really would be duplicate content. I am being careful as as we all well know I am not the ultimate arbiter of this

That is when you have them next to each other, imagine them more spun so it all passes copyscape on different websites scattered. Not really spammy is it?

I can understand your point if it was just a list of keywords thrown in.

 

[OldWelshGuy]

I see what you are saying, it is just to my eye, they are so close that they really would be duplicate content. I am being careful as as we all well know I am not the ultimate arbiter of this

Sorry my apologies I thought I had made it clear that this was just a sample to make clear that spun articles are not all junk. BADLY SPUN articles are junk, no question about that, and there is even a place for badly spun junk if used in agreement with all parties. i.e. if the site says it accepts spun content, then who is anyone else to decide they should not get it!

I deliberately spun that off the top of my head quickly without the use of any spinning software that suggests alternative phrases.

Here is a tip, articles die in article sites, so the beauty of a well spun well written article is that the instant a page is dropped by google, you can replace it with another to the same site. The article site wants pages in google, they earn their money from it, and as long as the articles served to them passes copyscape and is readable then what we have is a symbiotic relationship and not spam

If a site states no spun articles, then you ideally should honour that wish. My point with the 4 examples was, which is the otiginal, and which is the spun. The answer of course is that it is impossible to tell, because the most grammatically correct might well not be the original, it is just the best quality.

If you spend time on your spinning syntax (which for the benefit of Event domain and others means MANUALLY writing it), then the output content is unique enough for everyone to win. If you spin the anchor text author bio etc, then again that takes away a possible footprint give away in that department.

I think the statement I am trying (probably badly) to make is that Spinning doesn't have to mean spamming.

 

[ORDERED WEB]

That is when you have them next to each other, imagine them more spun so it all passes copyscape on different websites scattered. Not really spammy is it?

I can understand your point if it was just a list of keywords thrown in.

The issue here (forgetting all the other issues about the moralities of it) is laziness

Here we are shown 4 versions of the same text, that have been spun, and still more work needs doing with them. The text was only a few sentances long, and we are allready saying more work needs doing

Here is a scenario
You want 1000 articles each with 4 paragraphs of text, each article is 500 words long, thats 500,000 words. Even if the software does a half decent job of giving you a starting place - with all the will in the world, you are going to glaze over, repeat yourself and die of beordom trying to make them all different.

 

[DesignerNick]

The issue here (forgetting all the other issues about the moralities of it) is laziness

Here we are shown 4 versions of the same text, that have been spun, and still more work needs doing with them. The text was only a few sentances long, and we are allready saying more work needs doing

Here is a scenario
You want 1000 articles each with 4 paragraphs of text, each article is 500 words long, thats 500,000 words. Even if the software does a half decent job of giving you a starting place - with all the will in the world, you are going to glaze over, repeat yourself and die of beordom trying to make them all different.

OK so imagine this. I have 15,000 records in a database, all have say 15 or 20 variables with information about the product. Each product then has it's own page which gives 15,000 pages.

I don't want them to even slightly be duplicate so I spin the text and put the variables in so each and every one passes copyscape. Yes, it might be lazy but to sit there and write 15,000, why would I? Each page passes copyscape, it makes perfect sense in English and indexes nicely in Google and ranks too. What is the problem?

If you want to sit there and write those 1000 articles bit by bit then good luck, I would have probably made 10 more sites by then. It would take you forever to write them or a fortune to buy them.

 

[OldWelshGuy]

POD possibly you miss what is being proposed. You say we need 1000 articles to achieve a goal, if time and effort is spent on the preparation of the articles then 1000 wouldn't be needed also the article will spin many times and be unique.

it is easier and quicker to properly write syntax for an article than it is to write a completely new artile, it is more cost effective.

 

[MASSEY]

yeah yeah yeah - but thanks for the free plug!

You'll need a lot more free plugs than that
_____________________________________________________________


It's an interesting debate that has developed. So basically what we are saying is done properly it does work and does not have to be un-readable mashed up spam but even if it is un-readable mashed up spam they arent going to rank so it does not matter

 

[JohnnyCash]

They spun articles themselves on article directories or lower end blogs wont rank for something like "credit cards" or "payday loans", but there is the chance of someone landing on them directly if they type in something really obscure which happens to match up with the article, like "Were can I get a credit card 0% Birmingham" etc.