aj, everybody knows that most "one click" solutions to anything in this world are just good sales copy. Until you prove otherwise with the 'miracle' thesaurus I'm not going to change my opinion, especially not because an ever so slightly biased SpinnerChief developer told me to. You always take an aggressive/insulting tone when anyone posts ever so slightly (healthy) skepticism of your SpinnerChief.
If it were that damn easy then everyone would be auto generating awesome content and everyone would be rich. Unfortunately it doesn't work that way.
As I said, I'm not a developer of SpinChimp and have no affiliation with them apart from the fact that I'm a happy customer. The reason I don't use the SpinnerChief Elite and the miracle thesaurus is because it's way too expensive.
Please, I invite you to use your 'miracle' thesaurus to spin an article. Post the original article on here and post the spintax version. Don't use your 'newest' solution yet, keep it with the 'miracle' thesaurus. I want to see it at work. If it truly is awesome I will be happy to eat my words!
OK: My curiosity got the better of me and I checked out your miracle thesaurus. Its positives are that it does provide good quality auto spins, but the main reason for this is that it simply doesn't spin very much compared to what we need for SE's to determine our content as at least reasonably unique.
The main two problems I have with the miracle thesaurus are:
1. It only provides 1 or 2 variants per phrase spun - for bulk spinning, this is simply insufficient, and relevant to the original thread title, my above post indicates more along the lines of what needs to be done for bulk spinning, which is far above and beyond what the miracle thesaurus does. For bulk spins, we need at LEAST 5 correct synonyms on both phrase and word level, where possible. I would say my average is about 7-8.
2. It only spins (relatively common) phrases. Hence, in my opinion, it is not really miracle at all. Please don't go crazy on me for saying this, I just call them as I see them i.e. trying for constructive criticism here. As I mentioned in my above post, what you need is someone to go through the most common few thousand english words, including every variant form of them (i.e. for nouns, singular/plural, for verbs infinitive/3rd person singular/present participle/past simple/past participle, for comparatives/superlatives e.g. thin/thinner/thinnest including irregulars e.g. good/better/best, and so on), taking into account all possible contexts of the word and where grammatical correctness can be preserved according to these varied contexts, add as many synonyms as possible.
I looked at the level of spinning and while they can pass copyscape, they are nowhere near spun enough to properly 'fool' the search engines.
You imply that I am ignorant for not trying before voicing my skepticism, however for around 80 bucks, it's blatantly obvious that you are not going to get anything truly miraculous. Honestly I didn't see the point in wasting my time. As I said above, if your thesaurus were really a miracle, then you would be charging prices similar to Xrumer. And people who knew anything about spinning/the english language would be buying even at that high price.
With the SE algorithms becoming ever more sophisticated, even as recently as the panda updates, you've got to do a HELL of a lot more than simply change some of the more common phrases in an article in order for the content to be seen as at least reasonably unique. I wouldn't go anywhere near calling this a miracle thesaurus however it is an 'accuracy-centric phrase replacer'. Adding just 1 or 2 variants can't really be called spinning, adding just 1 or 2 variants of common phrases (not words) definitely can't be called spinning.
However, where this story becomes interesting is if you can, as your posts claim, make both a phrase based and word based combined thesaurus with lots of variations which still preserve maximum grammatical correctness. A daunting task which I initially said no one could be expected to do, but you snapped back that you are certainly doing the very same. So please, I welcome you to do the following:
1. Add more phrase based variants to the miracle thesaurus, 1-2 is not enough, always aim for at LEAST 5, while preserving grammatical correctness
2. Make your miracle thesaurus word based as well, with at least 5 synonyms for each word, and all grammatical forms thereof (as specified earlier in this post), taking special care to consider all common contexts of each word and adjust accordingly
3. Use spins to check, recheck, and check some more.
Then you will truly have a miracle thesaurus, worthy of its name! And I would certainly buy it. I would be curious to see what you are up to specifically in terms of your new Beta testing.
(BTW, I like SpinChimp the most because its interface is the easiest -- the extreme work it takes to add tens of thousands of synonyms is only possible with lightning quick addition of synonyms, which Chimp allows. That's why it's "beloved" to me, yes. But if someone else were to make a truly miracle thesaurus then I would praise their efforts too, without a doubt.)
