Best web 2.0 property creator tools?

Scritty made a very good point. It's not the software that matters in the first place. It's the quality of your content and the uniqueness of your web 2.0 property. People (or their algorithms) running web 2.0 are not stupid. If you won't treat them like they were stupid you will be fine ;).

D.
 
Advertise on BHW
moonlighsunligh said:
Actually i thik there is no such thing as web 2.0 sites.
Click to expand...

While I almost wish that was true, there is a definition (or at least a list), and Google themselves know exactly what that list/definition is:

Code: 
[URL]http://www.oreillynet.com/oreilly/tim/news/2005/09/30/what-is-web-20.html[/URL]

The WEB2 conference pretty much defines what WEB2 is - and Google send representatives. It was held originally in 2001, then every year since 2004 (so this Autumn with be the 10th - normally held in late October) While it is O'Reilly's baby - it's reports and definitions are taken by most in the industry to be the de-facto last word on everything WEB2

It goes as far as naming the exact platforms that our favourite search engine considers to be WEB2

So while I agree that the definition of WEB2 is fuzzy - the actual specification and labelling of sites and platforms that the search engines categorically DO CONSIDER TO BE WEB2 is very well defined.

In short;

If you use WEB2 platform - Google knows it is a WEB2 platform and that undoubtedly plays a part in its algorithm.
If all your 1st tier links are from the same sub group (WEB2) then you have made a clearly visible self promotion footprint.

Whether they act on it - or whether they will in the future who knows.
It's probably not the worst sort of spam. But the SE's have already taken action, albeit in a rather roundabout way.
Google's initial act was to devalue the hosted platforms themselves for not keeping their house in order and allowing the propogation of spam (Spring 2011)
In the intervening 18 months we have got smarter at getting around that - but in response, Googles ranking algo is getting more granular

Note the patent Google registered from about 10 days ago where URL based reductions might lead to a moderation in root domain authority in a staged and timed manner. This seems a pretty clear move towards a more granular ranking system, while keeping the connection between a site and it's subordinate URL's it allows Google to decide whether to treat them as one entity or to separate them - and to penalize or promote in a graduated manner.
Click to expand...

So checking something as simple as "are all or most of this sites direct authority links from WEB2 sites" is a very simple x check against a recognised and regularly updated list of platforms.

Will they tear you down if they see this as un-natural linking in your particular niche?
My gut feeling is - they probably will in the future.

My other [/facepalm] thought is - it's all so easy to be so much better than this in SEO. But most are too damn lazy to innovate and follow through on their ideas.

Scritty

[Noticed that while Yahoo, Bing and others sponser the WEB2 event Google just go - cheap feckers]
BTW the list of sponsors is V impressive. IBM, Intel, Dell, Pepsi and the list of those that attend varies from movie producers like Lucas, game producers like Blizzard, media from Fox, BBC and others. It's a big deal..but G can't be assed to stump up a few grand to get their name on the billboard. tut tut
 
But then, almost all websites we can use for link building are web 2.0 sites. Because, we can only post to sites which accept user generated content. Of course, there are a few exceptions, for example blog commenting. I'm not sure if bulletin boards are considered web 2.0 sites. As far as I can see, it leads to conclusion to build links only from PAD and link bait. But, if we do not do use 2.0 sites, then we're doing white hat.

If I was Google, I wouldn't count the links from web 2.0 sites at all.

But I guess, what i have said, isn't all true, so let me know where am I wrong at?
 
Last edited:
moonlighsunligh said:
But then, almost all websites we can use for link building are web 2.0 sites. Because, we can only post to sites which accept user generated content. Of course, there are a few exceptions, for example blog commenting. I'm not sure if bulletin boards are considered web 2.0 sites. As far as I can see, it leads to conclusion to build links only from PAD and link bait. But, if we do not do use 2.0 sites, then we're doing white hat.

If I was Google, I wouldn't count the links from web 2.0 sites at all.

But I guess, what i have said, isn't all true, so let me know where am I wrong at?
Click to expand...

Not sure what your point is, where your coming from or what your asking.
You ask me to let you know where you are wrong, and I'm baffled.
I just spent 20 minutes posting the situation. I can't put it any clearer than that.
Did you read my last post?

As for
"almost all websites we can use for link building are web 2.0 sites"
Click to expand...
- That IS just plain wrong.

What about...

Article sites?
Wiki sites?
Forums?
Video sites?
Press release sites?
Guest books?
Directories?
Blogs?
Picture sites?
Bookmarks?

They all take links - these aren't WEB2 (though there are some crossover sites - but on the whole, as genres they are not WEB2)

WEB2 make up a tiny fraction of the open sites that can be linked to. less than 4%.
Almost 80% of the web can be commented on or linked from or posted to and interacted with in some way or another.

My point is a list of WEB2 platforms is VERY well defined. They are very good to link from.
But a linking stratgy that JUST links from them as a first tier and nothing else is FLAWED and a risky way to proceed as you are creating an identifiable footprint.
Use the other accessible 76% of the internet
 
Scritty said:
Making a first tier out of JUST WEB2 sites is so "2009". Not a good idea at all. You are creating your own easily identifiable "look at me - I'm a self promoter" footprint - but everyone does it
Nuke and Ultimate Demon are both excellently supported applications that doa whole lot more than just create WEB2 sites and are constrantly getting updates, fixes and new features.

Zenno and Ubot are best used to do stuff that cheap professionally maintained tools don't already do.

The idea of using them to make your own Nuke clone or whatever (which does a feck of a lot more than just post to WEB2 ) seems like a collosal waste of time.
Like writing your own newspaper to read every night rather than spending a dollar and reading a professionally produced one.

Don't make the mistake of thinking that once you have written the scripts "that's it". It isn't.

Zenno 4 is really pretty buggy. 3 is ok and less buggy if you know the work arounds, there is a learning curve both to learn to script and to work around the bugs, then the scripts you make will need to be maintained as the sites changed.

Spending the equivalenent of a day or two a month fixing scripts when you can buy a tool that is maintained for a one off fee or well under $50 a month..well it depends whether you think your time is worth more than $2 an hour. If the answer to that really is "no" then I wouldn't waste your money on any tool at all - i'd do it all manually.

Zenno and Ubot can do so much more than copy what inexpensive professionally produced and maintained tools already do really well. But if that's what you want to spend your time doing...who am I to argue. :)

Scritty
Click to expand...

Couldn't agree more! Very true.
 
I'd honestly just do this manually. Or wait for clyde's new software, but still... manual is the approach I've personally taken.
 
jass11 said:
BHW user ningning is making a form filler for creating accounts/posting on Web2.0's

So its still a semi automatic way and a new option unlike Senuke/UD/Blogbot
Click to expand...

Yes, The tool I am making is universal and it will actually help you to sign up and post to any platform. It is not 100% automated more something like 80? The idea is to take the flexibility and quality from manual link building and the speed from automated tools and combine them in one tool.

I could still use a few more beta testers before it goes public. So if any of you want to try a new approach let me know.
 
great post!

really enjoy it! I would agree with the fact that web 2.0 is better to use proven tools instead of reinventing the wheel. but that would depend on how fast you are at programming... In any case, It's about resource allocation and return on your invested time.

cheers
 
I use Magic Submitter and while it's not perfect it gets the job done and it's less than half the price of SE Nuke.

Here's what platforms MS can post to out of the box, not to mention you can program any site you want into it.

Article Directories
Blogs (Lots of good Web 2.0 here)
Video Sites
PDF Sharing Sites
Web 2.0 (Profiles)
Wordpress Blogs
ELGG Blogs
Profile Links (Forums)
Bookmarking Sites
Pliggs
Press Release Sites
Microblogs (Twitter, etc..)
StatusNet Microblog
Link Directories
Guestbooks
Blog Comments

I mostly use MS for bookmarks, and posting to free blog sites. The blog commenter isn't very good, and the ELGG and Pliggs are great for tier 2.
 
Scritty said:
Not sure what your point is, where your coming from or what your asking.
You ask me to let you know where you are wrong, and I'm baffled.
I just spent 20 minutes posting the situation. I can't put it any clearer than that.
Did you read my last post?

As for - That IS just plain wrong.

What about...

Article sites?
Wiki sites?
Forums?
Video sites?
Press release sites?
Guest books?
Directories?
Blogs?
Picture sites?
Bookmarks?

They all take links - these aren't WEB2 (though there are some crossover sites - but on the whole, as genres they are not WEB2)

WEB2 make up a tiny fraction of the open sites that can be linked to. less than 4%.
Almost 80% of the web can be commented on or linked from or posted to and interacted with in some way or another.

My point is a list of WEB2 platforms is VERY well defined. They are very good to link from.
But a linking stratgy that JUST links from them as a first tier and nothing else is FLAWED and a risky way to proceed as you are creating an identifiable footprint.
Use the other accessible 76% of the internet
Click to expand...

Yes i did read your post. I wasn't clear if articles directories, wikis and forums are considered web 2.0 sites. But you cleared this up.

I am not sure if commenting on guestbooks and blogs is safe if there are so many outbound links. Also i loose some sites, because i posted article using AMR with links directly to my money sites. i guess because AMR directories are spammed to much. So i use them as T2 links only.

On the other hands, wiki, video sites , directories, pictures sites and bookmarks don't have this problem.

What are your thoughts about angela profiles?
By forum links, do you mean links from signature bellow your posts, or profile links?
 
twilightofidols said:
I use Magic Submitter and while it's not perfect it gets the job done and it's less than half the price of SE Nuke.

I mostly use MS for bookmarks, and posting to free blog sites. The blog commenter isn't very good, and the ELGG and Pliggs are great for tier 2.
Click to expand...

Why don't you use ELGG and Pliggs on tier1?

Have you tried and had bad effects on rankings?
 
moonlighsunligh said:
Why don't you use ELGG and Pliggs on tier1?

Have you tried and had bad effects on rankings?
Click to expand...

In my experience no I haven't had any bad effects using them. I just don't tend to use them directly to my money site as many of them are low quality sites. Due to the fact there is so many of them, I find them great for backlinking your backlinks.
 
I'd say, avoid SENuke and just find a reliable service offering the same tasks (i.e. web 2.0 account creation, posting). Especially, if it's done manually (and actually is).
 
Damn, I didnt check this thread for 1 day and it got so much info. BTW I still use senuke though. Planning to get UD this month or next and give it a try.
 
UD is better than senuke because of

1. Speed
2. Success rate
3. you can add your own list...
4. Of course price is cheaper than senuke
 
Rickstar is right about SEnuke. Poor value for money (for me, someone may think different).
Personally I would use a decent web 2.0 creation software.

D.
 
Scritty said:
WEB2 make up a tiny fraction of the open sites that can be linked to. less than 4%.
Almost 80% of the web can be commented on or linked from or posted to and interacted with in some way or another.
Click to expand...

I missed this one. There are lots of forums in which is it easy to get links from; however, generally, not many sites allow adding links. Lots of angela like profiles can be done, but most small sites, unless they are blogs actually doesn't allow any kind of links. Only way to get links from such sites is paying the webmasters.

So there is a limited number of sites, where we can get links from. And probably the biggest source of links are forums as they are the most used "platfom". Not profiles, but manual posting, and linking from signatures. Also there are loads of platforms/CMS-es which allows some kind of comment/profiles/blogs.
 
Advertise on BHW
You must log in or register to reply here.
Sign up now!

Main Menu

Home Main Forum List Black Hat SEO White Hat SEO BHW Newbie Guide Blogging Black Hat Tools Social Media Downloads

Marketplace

Account Selling Content / Copywriting EBooks / Methods Hosting Misc Proxies For Sale SEO - Link building SEO - Packages Social Media Social Media - Panels Web Design More

Making Money

Affiliate Programs Hire a Freelancer IM Journeys Making Money Pay Per Click Site Flipping Want to Buy

BlackHat World

Dispute Resolution Forum Suggestions & Feedback Introductions Lounge
Back
Top