Auto Approve Article Directory Club
- Thread starter G-S-T
- Start date
- Status
MrBeastsOnToast
Supreme Member
- Dec 17, 2011
- 1,359
- 606
Am i missing something here? why do the platforms need to be the same?
DamageX
Elite Member
- Sep 17, 2008
- 2,692
- 1,691
Less fiddling needed with the central membership/submission hub.
MrBeastsOnToast
Supreme Member
- Dec 17, 2011
- 1,359
- 606
Ahh i see, makes sense i guess. I created mine with a WP plugin / theme. Changing will not be a problem if we use the directory G-S-T has.
mindmaster
Elite Member
- Sep 16, 2010
- 5,671
- 3,112
G-S-T
Elite Member
- Jan 20, 2011
- 1,762
- 9,092
Yeah, if everyone can just hold back for a few days. There are things being put in place to make this a totally badass network.
We will have a central hub, with a submission system, so you only need to paste your spun content into a form and click send. It will go out to the whole network.
Were creating a custom script. so it does only what we want it to do. It will include an adsense ready template. It will be easy to setup, just add your site id and your adsense code to the script and then upload it to the root of your domain.
It will all be automated, so people can easily join without having to sit and wait for a response from either me or the other admin.
There are still a couple of grey areas that need to be discussed in public before were finalised.
More to come, comment on the thread to show your interest and you will get a PM from me once were finished and tested.
We will have a central hub, with a submission system, so you only need to paste your spun content into a form and click send. It will go out to the whole network.
Were creating a custom script. so it does only what we want it to do. It will include an adsense ready template. It will be easy to setup, just add your site id and your adsense code to the script and then upload it to the root of your domain.
It will all be automated, so people can easily join without having to sit and wait for a response from either me or the other admin.
There are still a couple of grey areas that need to be discussed in public before were finalised.
More to come, comment on the thread to show your interest and you will get a PM from me once were finished and tested.
mindmaster
Elite Member
- Sep 16, 2010
- 5,671
- 3,112
Just an idea,
we can put options to send the articles to the hole network 50% of it or a random number. Just to keep the footprint down.
we can put options to send the articles to the hole network 50% of it or a random number. Just to keep the footprint down.
G-S-T
Elite Member
- Jan 20, 2011
- 1,762
- 9,092
Good point
G-S-T
Elite Member
- Jan 20, 2011
- 1,762
- 9,092
1 area which im concerned about is the report. Im not sure its a good idea to give a submission report to users. As it would be easy for a G spy to hunt the network down.
I personally think it would be better for webmasters to be forced to be resourceful and search google for their article titles after a few days.
But I know others will want a full report so they can build their link wheels straight away.
What do you guys think?
Obviously, either way this works out, there will still be a control panel that tracks how many times your article was syndicated. But it would just be a number and not a list of urls. I have been a member of many similar networks over the years. They all follow the same principle as this.
The 1 exception is UAW, but they manually approve everything, so its not really the same model as were using.
The cut and dry of it is, this is an auto approve network and we dont want to broadcast the domains out to anyone who doesnt need to know them.
This is a key decision in my opinion and I know which way im swaying.
I personally think it would be better for webmasters to be forced to be resourceful and search google for their article titles after a few days.
But I know others will want a full report so they can build their link wheels straight away.
What do you guys think?
Obviously, either way this works out, there will still be a control panel that tracks how many times your article was syndicated. But it would just be a number and not a list of urls. I have been a member of many similar networks over the years. They all follow the same principle as this.
The 1 exception is UAW, but they manually approve everything, so its not really the same model as were using.
The cut and dry of it is, this is an auto approve network and we dont want to broadcast the domains out to anyone who doesnt need to know them.
This is a key decision in my opinion and I know which way im swaying.
Gary Becks
Power Member
- Apr 11, 2010
- 679
- 285
Just let users track their submissions by using unique pen names that they can search google for. This is the easiest solution to your problem IMO.
MrBeastsOnToast
Supreme Member
- Dec 17, 2011
- 1,359
- 606
I think to add unnecessary risk to a resource like this, for the sake of waiting a few days to build link wheels is also a bad idea. Patience is a virtue and all that jazz..
Just my 2 Cents..
G-S-T
Elite Member
- Jan 20, 2011
- 1,762
- 9,092
This would be good. Perhaps if we auto assigned 10 random pen names to each distrbiution.
So a member could just google "johnsmith231" + "barryhedge281" + "bilbogaggins63" + "dudeonalaptop411"
Then they would be able to easily identify their content.
mindmaster
Elite Member
- Sep 16, 2010
- 5,671
- 3,112
I think keeping the value of the network as high as possible is a higher priority in the long run. At least for me.
Gary Becks
Power Member
- Apr 11, 2010
- 679
- 285
Well, the easiest way to do it would be to allow users to have xxx number of pen names stored in a DB which would be associated with their account. Whenever they submit a new project they could then just pick a pen name for the project.
Also, if I may add - as much as I like the idea for this project. The whole AMR part of it is kind of useless IMO. Would be easier to hack up a quick web UI in php that would handle everything for users, that way the service could be accessible to more people who don't necessarily own AMR and may not be interested in purchasing it.
But hey - that's just me..
Also, if I may add - as much as I like the idea for this project. The whole AMR part of it is kind of useless IMO. Would be easier to hack up a quick web UI in php that would handle everything for users, that way the service could be accessible to more people who don't necessarily own AMR and may not be interested in purchasing it.
But hey - that's just me..
Nookie Monster
Senior Member
- Mar 28, 2010
- 967
- 466
What a coincidence. I just regged a domain that I wanted to have many useful articles on. Seems to me this would not only make a great linkwheel but also a good source for content as well.
Hope G-S-T will allow me to participate.
Hope G-S-T will allow me to participate.
G-S-T
Elite Member
- Jan 20, 2011
- 1,762
- 9,092
AMR isnt going to have anything to do with this. Check out page 2 of the thread.
Were working on a easy submit web interface for members to use.
The issue I see with having the same pen names associated with articles is that a member cant easily define if an article is from a month ago or yesterday.
But if they search for the 10 unique names we made for that specific submission, they can easily separate lasts months work from this months work.
Gary Becks
Power Member
- Apr 11, 2010
- 679
- 285
Ahh, ok. I have to admit, I didn't read the whole thread - and what I did read made me think that AMR would be used to submit to the sites.
I also agree with you about the pen names. 5 - 10 pen names each time would work, which was what I was referring to as well.
The only difference in our approaches is that I was referring to assigning pen names on a project by project basis as opposed to for each article submitted. Some projects may have a bunch of articles being submitted to promote one site - so then a user could scrape all the articles for one project as opposed to having to gather pen names for each article that they used to promote the one site - if that makes sense?
I also agree with you about the pen names. 5 - 10 pen names each time would work, which was what I was referring to as well.
The only difference in our approaches is that I was referring to assigning pen names on a project by project basis as opposed to for each article submitted. Some projects may have a bunch of articles being submitted to promote one site - so then a user could scrape all the articles for one project as opposed to having to gather pen names for each article that they used to promote the one site - if that makes sense?
-Randomization is good. Obviously we'd all like as many good links as possible, but part of keeping the "good" is not having a footprint. I'll take fewer submissions if it keeps the network good. Also it seems like there is enough interest that 75 or 50% will still be plenty of links.
-I understand the concern on the report. Perhaps one approach is to create some sort of qualifications that need to be met before you will get reports. I have no idea what this SHOULD be, but ideas would be amount of time in the network, number of sites, PR of sites. Maybe there are other ways like if you get to know someone well enough on bhw to trust them, whatever.
-I have questions about quality monitoring. Any plans for grammar/uniqueness/copyscape/etc checking at the central point? Alternatively could we provide an easy means for individual site owners to see a list of what was added to their site that day and monitor if they feel the content is inappropriate or not up to standards? I don't want any laziness or outright abuse to ruin the whole thing...
-I'm similarly concerned about "It will all be automated, so people can easily join without having to sit and wait for a response from either me or the other admin." I mean, I get it...but if it becomes TOO easy to join, seems like the chance for abuse goes way up. Adding a couple hoops for people to jump through would hopefully limit this.
-Thanks for considering adsense. I don't expect to make a ton (maybe I'm wrong), but it's nice to have provisions to hopefully defray registration and hosting costs.
-I understand the concern on the report. Perhaps one approach is to create some sort of qualifications that need to be met before you will get reports. I have no idea what this SHOULD be, but ideas would be amount of time in the network, number of sites, PR of sites. Maybe there are other ways like if you get to know someone well enough on bhw to trust them, whatever.
-I have questions about quality monitoring. Any plans for grammar/uniqueness/copyscape/etc checking at the central point? Alternatively could we provide an easy means for individual site owners to see a list of what was added to their site that day and monitor if they feel the content is inappropriate or not up to standards? I don't want any laziness or outright abuse to ruin the whole thing...
-I'm similarly concerned about "It will all be automated, so people can easily join without having to sit and wait for a response from either me or the other admin." I mean, I get it...but if it becomes TOO easy to join, seems like the chance for abuse goes way up. Adding a couple hoops for people to jump through would hopefully limit this.
-Thanks for considering adsense. I don't expect to make a ton (maybe I'm wrong), but it's nice to have provisions to hopefully defray registration and hosting costs.
G-S-T
Elite Member
- Jan 20, 2011
- 1,762
- 9,092
Yes i get you, like on UAW.
I guess we can have both options available, as long as the user is aware of how each option can benefit them, then they can choose for themselves.
- Status