commit: fb200d8 - #595 (2014-04-14 00:44:57 -0400)
This. This a thousand times.
Though we've some fancy new algorithms coming out that will basically kill the visibility of self-submissions overnight, it still means a lot to play by the community guideliens and what Tad posts
I like the openness of the give and take between "what the community likes to see" and "what I want the community to see." I feel those tensions, too. Well said!
"Posts from SEOmoz, about link building and submitted by Jason Acidre work better than others."
Oh God, I'm never going to live down that moan in that screenshot now am I, hah!
But you make a fair point. Some sort of throttling here of repeated submitting in short succession would be welcome.
For more data on what's worked well on Inbound, see Kane Jamison's excellent data analysis and write-up!
It's all well and good to promote a beautiful world of unicorns and faires where all the best content you produce gets submitted by the Inbound fairies. But that's not the world that exists. So yes, I occasionally self-submit. That's because for whatever reasons I don't happen to have an Inbound fairy that visits my site at night and shares my content. But...I am very selective about what I self-submit, and that shows. Very typically my self-submitted content gets upvoted well, proving that it deserved to be here. But if Ed is going to ban all self-submission, even from someone like me who submits far more from other sites than my own, and who regularly participates here in voting and commenting, then so be it. My best quality posts won't be here any more.
Sorry Tad,but your "just create great content and participate in the community and the Inbound fairies will reward you" is as much a fantasy as those who say "just create great content on your site and Google will rank you high!"
Mark you used the magic word.... Occasionally
As I'm sure a good majority of us will agree "occasionally" self submitting a piece of content won't piss people off but some users only ever self submit.
I've no idea what the proposed algo will do to self submissions but I'm sure a few tweaks could mean if you only self submitted 5%-10% of the time it wouldn't be any where near so bad as those in the 50%+ bracket
Thanks for the clarification, Ed. That sounds different from your algorithm comment. If there is some human judgment behind this, then in think its fair. I don't want to sound like I'm only here to get my own posts promoted. I really do respect this community and want it to be high quality.
That's why if I do self-submit its only a post that I really think says or contributes something unique, and only after waiting to see that it has been helpful to others (in social or on-site comments), and only after some time has gone by and no one else has shared it here.
But I'd still rather spend more of my time sharing other great content I come across, amd up voting it when others find it here.
Awesome. That's a good filter for self-submission. If someone writes something front-page worthy...but no one ever sees it here because they don't want to self-submit, that would be sad. I would want to see that regardless of who submits.
Mark, that's exactly the point of the post. You can't wait for the fairy doing nothing to attract it. That's why I suggested how to entice particular power users to actually visit your site more frequently. Last but not least in case you always self-submit your stuff you won't give power users the chance to do so. Social news is not social networking where you self-promote immediately after publication without annoying people.
Additionally this post is a a proof of concept itself. It engages with the community and thus gets more attention here despite being published on a drak horse blog nobody knows yet.
Thanks for the response Tad. I wasn't trying to shoot down your ideals; I like them! And in my case I believe I will need to self-submit less and less; I've built good relationships with some of the "power users" on social networks outside here. Recently some of my posts that did reasonably well here were submitted by them. I'm really more making the case for someone who is truly writing some awesome stuff but hasn't (yet) caught the attention of the right people, and/or doesn't yet have a large enough following to get submitted.
You're hitting on something here, Mark. It's not as simple as "if you love it, let it be free".
How to do well on Inbound.org: A). Post anything SEO related B). Post anything related to SEOmoz C). Post anything SEO related from SEOmoz D). don't post about social media, community management, entrepreneurship, or basically anything else that Hacker News would love.
And that's part of the challenge too -- I'm certain I read a post by a mod not too long ago wanting content to branch out into other areas besides just SEO. I check the PR tab several times a week and it's pretty light. I'll tell you what: PR types are afraid to post here because they think they'll get banned.
They won't get banned Frank, only "not cool" behaviour gets you banned. I'd love to see more PR types on Inbound, I think it's one of the most under-represented areas here with lots of latent story telling behind it. Look at that category by all time and you'll also see the members behind the most voted PR category content are not PR pros in the main.
And that's a good point. Pure PR is dissolving. The lines are blurry. One of the things that attracted me here was SEO, because PRs and SEOs need each other more than ever and can really do well together. Each has to know a little bit about the other discipline. An SEO that I have worked closely with in the past is who got me interested in Inbound.
We're working on this at the moment - the community was seeded with many SEO-types and we're trying to drive diversification. To this end, we've teams of moderators tasked to making a handful of categories stand out and have great, fresh content on their category homepages. We're trying more non-SEO related (but still Inbound) AMA's (Avinash's, Peep's). I'm submitting more and more non-SEO related posts.
I'd love to see more PR types on here - any suggestions for who to reach out to? Possible AMA guests?
Gini Dietrich, Dave Armano, Rohhit Bhargava, Bill Stoller, Rochelle Veturis, Shel Holtz, Richard Edelman, Steve Rubel. Not everyone is a pure play PR pro (not even sure that exists anymore), but the names I've listed here are more PR than not, or got started in PR. All of them are influential, in my professional PR opinion.
I'm on it... :-)
True. I've been on Hacker News long enough to notice that they favor Ycombinator stuff as well, plus evertyhing from TechCrunch, at least in 2009. Then I got banned on HN for being "idiotic".
As a moderator I'm not opposed to self-submissions at all, as long as it isn't crap. Ed has mentioned this in the comments above as well. If you write a really great post and decide to submit it yourself, cool, then you get all the karma points, I can dig it. If you consistently submit sub-par, self promotional junk, then I'm going to take issue with that.
Sometimes Inbound community members never give importance to blogs which are not very visible in industry. Some may have very good values but never got a up vote here. But if we submit the same blog in other sites it will be more discussed than here.
Yesterday I submitted 2 blogs, one was written by me & other was an infographics about how to increase website speed. The inforgraphic was deleted & other didn't got any upvote.
The below are the links of both post, if you feel these are just spam or very low quality content, kindly do reply here. :)
http://www.techwyse.com/blog/infographics/improve-your-websites-page-load-speed-for-better-seo/ ---> this was deleted.
waiting for all moderators suggestions on this.
Christy - neither link loads - that might be a reason.
Hi Paul, the links are working fine.
They loaded for me; try again Paul. I'm not a mod so I can't speak to why the infographic post was deleted. But I did read your self-submitted post. It does have a catchy title that might have gotten me to click it if I had happened to see it in "Incoming." But, while it's certainly not a low quality post, it isn't anything all that special either. It's a collection of tips that we've all seen elsewhere and read a hundred times.
If you want to get upvoted and make a splash on the hot page, you've got to have a unique take, a new idea, a piece of news that no one else has uncovered yet, or show us how to do something in a way we haven't though of before.
Even then, it can be hard to get those first upvotes (I know!). A catchy or provocative title certainly helps. I think the hardest battle is to get any inbound reader just to click open your post in the first place as they scan down the onslaught of "Top Ten Way to Blah Your Blah in 2013" titles in incoming. But even if your title inspires a click thorugh, you've still got to wow us once we read your post.
I completely understands & accept that my self submitted post was a general info, I only mentioned the points which are really working for us. I have tried all those methods & the sucess rate was high. The main thing is many small business Clients don't want to invest in content but they want to rank locally for some of the most competitive keywords.
Surely I will write blog which is creative piece of idea & which I have tried personally.
Christy - truthfully I flagged a recent TechWyse submission that was self-submitted (I don't know if it was you or a colleague of yours who submitted it) because:
1) It received 3 upvotes in less than 5 minutes and only a 4th submission 1-2 hours later. In my eyes, this was not reflective of 'natural' upvoting.
2) Two people left comments saying "hey, this is awesome!" When I checked their profiles, it said they both worked for TechWyse. However the style of their comments suggested they were new to the content and in no way connected to it - this is arguably a ruse to make it look like random people admired it, when in actuality it was 'staged.'
I'm very sorry if you felt that it was removed unfairly and also if it was a good infographic/piece of content, but in my opinion, it didn't strike me as a 'genuine' submission, self-submitted or otherwise. I can't have been the only one to think this, as I believe mods will only remove flagged content if multiple people flag it, so it seems I wasn't the only one who felt this way...
Note: I should've said your colleagues said something like "this is awesome" - they said something different, but if was of that sentiment. Just thought I ought to clarify.
Agree with Steve - it really peeves me to see staged comments by agencies. Not cool...
Hey Ed, just imagine if someone from Hubspot or Seomoz post here and with in 5 mins it gets 2 upvotes from the same people who are working these agency then will this be flagged as spam.?
In this case I too was really annoyed when the infographics was deleted. I agree there is mistakes from colleagues in my company, they shouldn't have commented or upvoted. I or my agency never indulged in spam or never promoted any kind of spammy activities. :)
But it's the intent that matters. Both SEOmoz and HubSpot are anomalies - they each have colossal communities who submit their content. If it's two votes, and a couple of comments in a just a few minutes all from one agency, can a moderator be blamed for thinking "not cool" and deleting it?
Thank you Steve for the detailed clarification.
1) Infographic post which I submitted was a good quality one, as you said it got 3 upvotes in less than 5 mins, 2 of them were from TechWyse. But with in less than 2 hours the post got 7 upvotes, all the rest from were normal Inbound marketers.
I never tried manipulating or went againist Inbound.org rules. I hate spam & I never want to be a spammer in such a good community.
2) As I said 2 people were from TechWyse, they were really not engaged in any kind of spam. if this was the case then these people would have been caught earlier. As I sad earlier I never encourage spam.
we really took effort to collect data & create the infographics, I know it may have many flaws but I believe it have value. Whatever steps which has been mentioned in inforgraphics have implemented by us in various sites & results were amazing. I feel this will help several inbound marketers to speed up their websites.
I accept 2 upvotes was from TechWyse but what about the rest 5? have anyone thought about those upvotes? I don't think those were fakes. I request mods to reconsider the post. Thanks!
But that's precisely the problem, Christy. Those first 2 upvotes shouldn't have happened. I understand why - to get it onto the main page - but it wasn't you and your colleagues' choice to decide.
What if everyone immediately upvoted their posts to get onto the main page? It would be no different to the Incoming page, plus it would devalue the purpose of the site as a whole. And that's the issue here.
I completely understand the issue & if I was in your place then may be may be I would also do the same as you did. But may be I will consider deleting the comments by the members which seems to very promoting rather than deleting the thread.
I prefer if there is quality in a post then I believe there will not be any harm in keeping the post in Inbound.org. I believe you might reconsider the post. :) Thanks!