WordPress Uniquefier Plugin?

MontyzPython

BANNED
Joined
Nov 3, 2007
Messages
862
Reaction score
377
Has anyone tried this? This plugin supposedly leaves the content unchanged to the reader but makes it seem unique to search engines by adding some invisible HTML coding.

I wonder if it works...

hxxp://forums.digitalpoint.com/showthread.php?t=949300
 
im gonna buy its only 10$ and the concept sounds really good
 
just bought! it works pretty much as advertised... just hope google doesnt catch on this one pretty soon...
 
And the rapidshare download URL is ..........? :D



( I would kill for a Nobel peace prize.)
 
just bought! it works pretty much as advertised... just hope google doesnt catch on this one pretty soon...

Would love to hear your experience with the plug in. I didn't see anything on the site mention updates or new release support.

From what I gather its a modification to the code that causes the content to be read as unique, not an actual rewrite of the content.

Curious to know what that mod is, and if it is affecting any other onpage elements negatively. Also, the 'proof in the pudding' is testing the unique nature of content on copyscape before and after the plug in is enabled. AFTER the plug-in is enabled, it would appear that your content is not viewed as duplicate by copyscape.

Is this the same content spidering system used by major search engines to determine dup content?

Thanks!
-reqd
 
It works and should not be flagged by google. it should also be on the do not share list and is worth every penny of $10, give the guy a break he has come up with an awesome bit of code. I bought it yesterday and what it does is randomly adds characters to your posts in the code that does not affect the visitor view but makes the post 100% unique content.
 
Does it work with all versions of Wordpress?
 
I have it on the latest version but I am pretty sure it will work with earlier versions of WP as there is not a great deal to the code and just a couple of calls to WP functions, here's the site:
hxxp://unique*fier.c0m/
 
hehee just try ... :D
I will buy it, the owner seems not online right now
 
Bought it, doesn't work right, it seems incompatible with some of the plugins I use. I don't want to have to uninstall the other plugins just to use this. I'm talking to him about a patch...
 
So Far So Good! I am testing with cop*yspca*pe..Does anyone want to share other testing sites or Tactics?
 
So Far So Good! I am testing with cop*yspca*pe..Does anyone want to share other testing sites or Tactics?

When you test it with Co*p*ys*c*ape you will notice the random way this script works.
Checking you sites multiple times gives you different results. (3 copies, no copies, 10 copies, etc.)

In Google your site shows up good.

As it seems, from a short test, in Yahoo it's different. Yahoo deletes all the special code (doesn't translate it) so your description in the search results looks strange with letters missing.

When I take a page (indexed in G and Y) and take a bit of text from that page it shows up in G but not in Y.

My guess is G indexes the page and translates the code in letters. Yahoo indexes the page without the letters formed by the code.
 
As it seems, from a short test, in Yahoo it's different. Yahoo deletes all the special code (doesn't translate it) so your description in the search results looks strange with letters missing.

I wonder if:
Code:
<meta name=?description? content=?informative description here?>
fixes the way it is displayed in yahoo serps, you can use the plug-in headspace to change the description of posts.
 
I wonder if:
Code:
<meta name=?description? content=?informative description here?>
fixes the way it is displayed in yahoo serps, you can use the plug-in headspace to change the description of posts.

That will probably solve the way it ends up in the SERPS.

Leaves the problem (in Yahoo) that your content doesn't contribute to the keywords you rank for.

If I'm correct it would mean you had to put the entire post after the "meta name="keywords" content=".

I guess that's not a real solution.

I'll try to find out why Yahoo treats those codes the way it does (omitting them).
 
Back
Top