"Article Encoding". What are your thoughts?

Recently I can across some people who are doing "Article Encoding" where they encode an article so that google algorithm thinks it's 100% unique and it is readable by humans. When it is not "encoded" it would look something like this:

h?i. I th?i?n?k Y?ou?r c?oo?l.

When posted on a blog or squidoo it would look like this to everyone else:

Hi. I think your cool.

Anyways, I was just wondering if anyone on the board is using this technique. If you are using it, what success are you having? And your general thoughts on it.

Thnaks

BeckyMarie said:

Recently I can across some people who are doing "Article Encoding" where they encode an article so that google algorithm thinks it's 100% unique and it is readable by humans. When it is not "encoded" it would look something like this:

h?i. I th?i?n?k Y?ou?r c?oo?l.

When posted on a blog or squidoo it would look like this to everyone else:

Hi. I think your cool.

Anyways, I was just wondering if anyone on the board is using this technique. If you are using it, what success are you having? And your general thoughts on it.

Thnaks

Click to expand...

Just started using it as of today on a new EMD, will start posting data if i start to rank the site well.

Personally I have mixed feelings about it. I doubt that Google's algorithm isn't capable of noticing such encoding. And if it isn't recognising it right now, it surely will in the future as more and more people use spun content encoded this way.

http://www.contentboss.com/pass-copyscape.php

- Convert there for free and read the warnings.

I've been using Article Rewriter Wizard and the best use for such a system is for selling articles.

It is too risky to use on your own sites, but let other people use them! They are the ones looking for cheap articles.

And yes, you can use it on web 2.0 and blog sites to create link wheels or pyramids and blast it with scrapebox to get some backlinks.

Hi,

for those who want to test Article Encoding, you can use this BETA Link here:
http://www.enchantedarticles.org/enchanter_webif.php?login=0a160ca9f9c8edac254e05090e71ac19




Randolph

Considered doing it for a few minutes, and then decided that at some point Google is going to say enough, rip through to find every piece of content that is doing that, and bam....you're gone...bye bye. I've seen this too many times before.

Jascoken is a pro at this, try looking him up or shooting him a PM...

From a conservative point of view I dont use it on my sites but on buffer sites...like was mentioned, one change and BAM!! So using it as part of a web 2.0 or article distribution strategy is not a bad idea as long as it is part of a well rounded link building strategy.

Not convinced that this is a good idea at all, which is why I've never used them. Unfortunately I can't comment on whether they are currently doing any good as a result. All I can say is that I'm sure at somepoint Google is going to rip the assholes of anyone who used this type of system.

Used for ranking the results aren't bad, but not great either. You still have to backlink, which implies costs greater than what you would have paid for unique content in the first place. Not to mention you risk losing it all.

My "encoded" sites get a trickle of traffic with a bare minimum of backlinking, though I get ten times more from recurring visitors, youtube and rss feeds.

Using this on buffer sites is good if you need a quick web 2.0 layer. But don't expect it to last. There's a way to bulk spin for free (assuming you already have GAP):

http://www.blackhatworld.com/blackhat-seo/black-hat-seo/377386-tutorial-how-char-spin-stopwords-add-images-upload-bulk.html

If you do 100 articles per buffer site you can get 10 sites up with scheduled content for 6 months, complete with images. Would only take you about a day. It won't stay around forever, but it's a lot of content and it's fast.

I've been using Unicode character spinning since around 2007 for various reasons.

The bottom line is it's just another grey hat technique for manipulating content and getting it to appear unique. You should never use it on any of your owned assets, only on public sites; like article directories and 2.0's.

I've pushed out just shy of a million articles over the last 4 years, and that's just for my own sites. I've done a hell of a lot more for SEO corporate clients. I've used character spinning on at least half of them and have yet to experience any negative effects. I only character spin on top of already braces-spun reasonable quality content though.

Over the last year I've been using AMR heavily with char-spinning, and it has definitely increased indexing rates. Pre-panda, char-spinning hugely increased indexing, now it seems to roughly double it. Remember though, if you're char-spinning junk then it will be deleted like any other junk; it's not a fix for crap content!

Our own software systems and tools have built in de-spinners and text cleaners, and Google have no doubt already cottoned on to this, as it's far from new...

But the bottom line is, if you're only using it on public sites, then you can't lose anything, and if it increases indexing, then it's a bonus. Google has always avoided passing negative juice along a link; they will just ignore it, as otherwise it would be easy to penalise your competitors. Now, this CAN be done - but you need enormous volume from very bad neighbourhoods, and this is not what we're talking about. The sites that these char-spun properties are sited on can't be simply tarred with one brush because there are a few hundred char-spun articles in place. Google will simply ignore the link-juice if they feel it's SEO manipulation. But then they do this anyway since Panda.

Whether or not you use it is down to you. If you're grey/black hat - then why the hell wouldn't you use every tool in your arsenal. SEO is a constantly changing game, and if we never did anything because it 'might' backfire on us, then we'd never get any aggressive link-building done.

I'll certainly continue to push out 25k+ articles per week using it, and also on thousands of 2.0s.

You can read more about the technique on our explanation page:

http://www.ubertoolz.com/CharSpinning.html

Any questions... Let me know...

Armi2009 said:

Personally I have mixed feelings about it. I doubt that Google's algorithm isn't capable of noticing such encoding. And if it isn't recognising it right now, it surely will in the future as more and more people use spun content encoded this way.

Click to expand...

That was exactly my feeling of them.... Just had someone on fiverr sell me "100% unique articles". They were all unique because they were encoded.

in my opinion it can work for a short time but sooner or later google will catch up with this trick

Google more recently improved it's ability to determine the quality of content...

Go to Google --> Search Tools --> Reading Level

As such, character encoded content will score significantly lower and therefore I believe it will not rank as well in the near future. At the moment it appears as though Google has not caught on so take advantage while you can but, expect it to burn up in flames... I advise using for short term strategies only.

Hey randolph60,

Are you the author of Article Magic? If so, nice to meet you XD. I was awarded a job on vWorker recently to basically duplicate your work, but it's kind of cool meeting you 'on the wire' ^_^ I feel like I just meet a celeb haha

I've used it to build a shitload of 2nd tier web 2.0 properties very quickly, but it's just a small part of my overall link strategy. 1st tier 2.0 are unique handwritten content. As of right now all my char spun properties are getting indexed, so they're doing what I need them to do...get my first tier contextual and edu links indexed and pass a little juice.

Any tool can be useful if used properly.

BeckyMarie said:

That was exactly my feeling of them.... Just had someone on fiverr sell me "100% unique articles". They were all unique because they were encoded.

Click to expand...

That's very unfair, and they should have stated that. I'd ask for a refund, as this is clearly cheating their customers...

Following that line of thought, I could sell 100% unique articles all day long - I'll just send you the same wikipedia page char-spun to hell, or go one step further and just send you a page of 500 randomly generated words. If someone says they're selling unique content, then it should be readable, appropriate to your topic request, and not use any kind of obfuscation - that's your prerogative - not theirs!

BTW... If you're looking for regular original article content, then our service provides 3 x 500 word articles per day across over 50 different niches; that's 90 per month for only $47, as well as access to all our toolz, including a powerful char-spinner, 3D ultra-spinner (UberCubez), Title Builder and Link Coder amongst others.

Remember; with this whole 'unique' content thing - that there is really no such thing as completely unique content; with the trillion+ pages already on the internet, you can pretty much guarantee that most sentences could be found somewhere. I mean how many different ways can you say 'if you want to lose weight, then eat less calories' ?

...Spinning for site content should aim to be 75%+ unique - and articles should be 30-50%+. Duplicate content filters look for several instances of exactly the same phrases; as otherwise everything would trip them. We've been auto-building large networks (250 sites at a time) for years - and we use UberCubez (Ultra-Spun) articles to create each 1000+ page site. They are all around 75% unique - and we've never had any issues with ranking, across a LOT of domains.

Just DON'T use unicode/char spinning on your 'money' sites!