Article thieves BEWARE SideWiki.

[cesarsan]

Have you ever been to YouTube? Have you ever seen the high quality, intelligent, humane comments people post there?

Imagine "YouTube quality" comments all over your site... Google owns YouTube and they can't keep the crap out on one of their own sites. Will they bother to try to clean yours?

[AmyBrown]

You can add a Webmaster SideWiki that stays in the top position if your site is linked to Google Webmaster Tools. I've gone through a few sites and added full-page Sidewikis to discourage the type of spam being discussed. It's per page so will be time intensive/prohibitive for large sites.

Sidewiki : Create a webmaster Sidewiki entry - Toolbar Help

[Marty S]

It's quite interesting to see the emotional responses to this subject. This may be a tough sell for Google.

[Fernando Veloso]

This is going to be WAR.

Careful. Associating giving power to the consumers with what Google is doing is a dangerous step.

Google is not giving power to consumers - they could care less with this piece of crap.

Google is just creating a war zone for webmasters.

[Kay King]

How long will it be before sales pages have sidewikis saying "buy it from my site instead and I'll give you a rebate"?

How long before you run a site as an Amazon affiliate and have sidewiki statements saying "you can get this cheaper at .....".

How long before google starts running ads on sidewiki? Wouldn't that be the logical way to get people to install it - the chance they might be paid a few cents?

Who is likely to install sidewiki? New people online - kids playing around - marketers who think they can use it to advertise - people with a lot of time to chat or with agendas.

I can see this added to social sites - you use those sites for free and you take what you get. Stating that a gmail account is used for security is a thin bit of reasoning to me.

If I build a site, write the content, do the graphics and PAY to host it - I don't do that so people can chat with each other about it. I hope google has more in mind for security than "log into gmail" or they might be tested legally on this.

Will hosting companies be able to offer "sidewiki proof" hosting? Lots of potential - and pitfalls - with this thing.

Several of my sites are getting significant traffic from Bing now - could it be google feels a need to "stay ahead"? Sounds like the only way to avoid it is to use google's web tools - meaning all roads lead to google?

kay

[Joseph Park]

Wow, it's going to be a lot of work to track all the sites (in case it's many)
and comment on each one of them to divert traffic back to yours.

Every time Google comes up with something, it seems we're on the frontline
to be notified from this forum. I love it.

[Kirk Ward]

Originally Posted by Marty S

It's quite interesting to see the emotional responses to this subject. This may be a tough sell for Google.

You ain't just a whisslin' Dixie, Marty.

What this is, is a large entity capitalizing on the efforts of others and stomping those little suckers flat. They might get away with it, they might not.

Reminds me of Bob Sarnoff, who was so egotistical he couldn't stand it if anyone didn't call him General, and what he did to the kid who invented a method for TV to actually work. (Look up "The Last Lone Inventor.".)

I don't like it.

I think it is co-opting the effort a Webmaster is putting into the development of their site for the benefit of someone who did not contribute the effort to build the product. It has a tremendous potential for abuse, and I just don't see any checks and balances other than the hue and cry of the masses.

So yes, I have gotten emotional on this. I think that is the only tool we have.

That and a lawsuit if Google missteps.

K
.

[LB]

We already have warriors using it to spam:

Have You Seen SideWiki on Google Toolbar?

From that thread:

He He,

I've just been adding SideWiki's to the web sites with the top SERPS for my keywords stating something like "This site is O.K. but lacks info., for more information about <keyword> why not check out <www.mysite.com>".

I've also added SideWikis to the actual Google results for my keyword but not sure if they will show. They aren't at the moment.

I've then even made a few fake Google accounts and gone back to those SideWikis and clicked the 'YES this was useful' vote. Other people have already clicked the 'Yes' vote as well so people are looking!!

[wordwizard]

Whoa! This is truly scary!

Hopefully, Google will come to its senses.

How in the world can they be allowed to add these things to websites they don't own??? (without being invited in).

Or did I miss something?

[Lian]

I think we should start a thread asking fellow warriors for positive SideWiki comments on each others websites.

Can google prevent this? Won't this be a misuse?

And yes. Can I start a community to comment against my competitors?

I am apprehensive about SideWiki.

Lian

[davezan]

Originally Posted by healymedia

Google is giving any joe on the internet the power to add content to my site whether I like it or not.

Unless I misunderstood what I read about SideWiki by far, they aren't putting
any content directly on one's site. Using your billboard analogy, Google puts
it outside the property owned by you.

A thousand pardons if this doesn't explain clearly, but think of it like someone
put a billboard a few meters away from your house or office. People write just
about whatever they want about you on that, yet they aren't writing anything
on your house or office's walls.

Another difference here is Google's allowing users to do that using their own
proprietary software, or toolbar in this case. Users see your site, put comment
via SideWiki, Google Toolbar or Firefox-with-SideWiki users see the comments,
yet nothing's necessarily added to your site other than what people do see in
Google's thingies no one's required or forced to use.

But...we all agree everything's open to abuse anyway. You can bet Google has
prepared a process to handle that, and it's subject to change as time goes by.

Of course, there's no stopping anyone from finding some possibly enforceable
claim against Google. Claiming some form of material harm or what-not.

Originally Posted by Lian

Can I start a community to comment against my competitors?

Sure you can. And your competitors can either ignore it yet still make money,
other users will totally ignore you, etc.

Anything can happen.

[Marty S]

Originally Posted by davezan

Unless I misunderstood what I read about SideWiki by far, they aren't putting
any content directly on one's site. Using your billboard analogy, Google puts
it outside the property owned by you.

A thousand pardons if this doesn't explain clearly, but think of it like someone
put a billboard a few meters away from your house or office. People write just
about whatever they want about you on that, yet they aren't writing anything
on your house or office's walls.

Another difference here is Google's allowing users to do that using their own
proprietary software, or toolbar in this case. Users see your site, put comment
via SideWiki, Google Toolbar or Firefox-with-SideWiki users see the comments,
yet nothing's necessarily added to your site other than what people do see in
Google's thingies no one's required or forced to use.

Quite right, and thank you for making it more clear than I was able to.

[bgmacaw]

Originally Posted by davezan

Unless I misunderstood what I read about SideWiki by far, they aren't putting
any content directly on one's site. Using your billboard analogy, Google puts
it outside the property owned by you.

And this is exactly what got gator.com sued into oblivion.

[Marty S]

Originally Posted by bgmacaw

And this is exactly what got gator.com sued into oblivion.

"Gator develops software that manages passwords and fills out forms for about 10 million Web surfers, who often download the application unwittingly through other popular file-sharing programs. Also bundled in Gator's software is a program called OfferCompanion, which monitors Web surfing behavior and delivers targeted pop-up ads to viewers. For example, a Web surfer may see an advertisement for Ford Motor--delivered by Gator--while visiting Toyota.com."

I cant even begin to list the differences between this and SideWiki.

[davezan]

Originally Posted by Marty S

Quite right, and thank you for making it more clear than I was able to.

Heh, you're welcome. It's understandable how folks can get emotionally upset
about things like this, but sometimes it can become clearer if one tries to set
aside their feelings and understand the method behind the madness.

And from what I read about Gator.com, they're not sued into oblivion. They've
been sued, temporarily ordered not to display pop-ups of trademarks, bought
out by another party, but still doing business as usual minus the causes of its
original legal headaches.

[bgmacaw]

Originally Posted by Marty S

I cant even begin to list the differences between this and SideWiki.

That's only because you're intentionally ignoring them.

Google is already on a fast track to US Federal Court on a number of matters. I see SideWiki as just another rail on that track.

[Marty S]

Originally Posted by bgmacaw

That's only because you're intentionally ignoring them..

No sir, not all. Its because it would be a waste of time listing ALL of them.

[Sean Ski]

If your site is genuinely good and people like it and say good things about it then whats a couple of nay-sayers gonna do? Provide good content and people will enjoy your site, the good sites always rise to the top, even if there are negative people trying to bring them down.

[J smith]

The abuse this thing will get is going to be legendary. How awesome is this? instead of people commenting on some review site or forum or whatever they can comment right on the site, that people going to that site will see (right away?)

Now you can put up a link on a number 1 ranked site for keywords that are nearly impossible to attain (weight loss, make money online etc etc) makea masked negative comment (e. this site is ok, but .. like the xampel above) and slap on your link! Then pay someone on elance to create a few hundread accounts and have them vote for your "comment" to make it the top one (if that's how it works)

Actually, just pay someone a few bucks to "comment" on every top 10 site for all the keywords related to your site on top of the "voting" to make those comments show up first. Then pay the same people to put up favorable comments on your sites.

Lol, rather amusing actually, only hope is that this goes away or not enough people use it to matter. otherwise google has just reduced SERPs meaning while simultaneously replacing backlink building with sidewiki's "negative comments" building.

[Martin Luxton]

This is cool and maybe Google can also arrange for commenters on your website to stand outside the Houses of Parliament in London and say what they think.

Oops, just remembered. Scrap the Houses of Parliament bit. It's illegal. But I'm sure there will be no legal problems with people superimposing obscene graffiti over my websites.

I'm sure people are already working on a new tool

Blast your competition out of the water with the SideWiki Reputation Smasher!

With our 500 million gmail addresses and dynamic IP software, you can destroy a web rival in seconds . . .

Just sayin'


Martin


P.S. This is not an emotional response. Just one scenario that could result from SideWiki.

[IM Headlines]

I was just reading about this, it's TERRIBLE!

Especially when you own salespages that their only purpose
is to sell.

People will be distracted.
Haters can ruin your reputation very easily.


WE ALL HAVE THE RIGHT TO ACCEPT OR DECLINE CONVERSATIONS
ON OUR WEBSITES.

AND NOW THANKS TO GOOGLE, WE CAN'T....


The ones that are defending this have absolutely
no idea of the consequences that this little "piece
of crap" will lead to.

I have a feeling that this will not last very long though.
Google will probably get sued by a lot of other huge
corporations soon enough...

Sidewiki currently does not support comments over internal or SSL (https) encrypted pages.

Ha Ha - Take that google .... I bet that bites them in the &^%$$#% Yep at least one of my sites is full SSL...

James

[davezan]

Originally Posted by bgmacaw

That's only because you're intentionally ignoring them.

Are you referring to Gator.com originally sued for their pop-ups showing ads of
trademarks redirecting actually to the mark holders' competitors?

[E. Fire]

Originally Posted by bgmacaw

Sorry, I posted the Onion "Google Opt Out" video yesterday.

My prediction is that this will go away soon because this treads closely to being adware like Gator.com's banner replacement malware (circa 2001-2003) that large corporations like the New York Times and Dow Jones & Company filed suit against. Google stockholders should see this as a serious legal liability and urge management to pull it ASAP.

I was thinking exactly the same thing as I was reading this thread. I see many similarities to parasiteware. Instead of hijacking my links, my entire website is, in a sense being hijacked.

As to the "if you have good content, what do you have to fear?" argument - really not an argument but a thinly veiled ad-hominem but I digress - it is precisely because I want to preserve the quality of that content that I do not like the idea that users are allowed to pollute it. I research my content carefully and try to craft it to be as clear and helpful as possible. The fact that a user can now come along and "contribute" additional content - which may be factually incorrect or misleading it is potentially harmful.

Even worse - think about the implications of anyone with a SideWiki now being able to add "helpful" content that cannot be fact checked and edited, to the CDC website, PuBMed, or other important authority sites where the public goes for critical information.

[edmltw]

Now instead of writing SEO articles to the directories, you can submit them directly to the sidewiki bar. LoL. Another avenue of increasing your site's SEO without compromising on your site's overall look. Instead of asking your ghostwriter to add more content to your side, you could ask him/her to add it to the sidewiki under your name too. =) Establish yourself as a real expert in real life.

If its here to stay, embrace it. If it doesn't, leave it. If you cannot change the world to fit yourself, then change yourself to fit the world.

Regards,
Edmund

[Marty S]

Originally Posted by TheRichJerksNet

Sidewiki currently does not support comments over internal or SSL (https) encrypted pages.

Ha Ha - Take that google .... I bet that bites them in the &^%$$#% Yep at least one of my sites is full SSL...

James

What do you have to hide though? If a SideWiki user comes to your site to find that you have blocked ALL comments about your content, will this not raise concerns?

Originally Posted by Marty S

What do you have to hide though? If a SideWiki user comes to your site to find that you have blocked ALL comments about your content, will this not raise concerns?

I have nothing to hide... I do not want scammers, warez users, frauders, affiliate spammers, competition, and etc posting their crap on my site..

You still do not understand eventhough it has been explained to you many times.. I guess if you was to lose your business over this then you would understand.

James

[Frank Donovan]

Originally Posted by Marty S

What do you have to hide though? If a SideWiki user comes to your site to find that you have blocked ALL comments about your content, will this not raise concerns?

Hmm. I see what you mean.

I've just noticed my next-door neighbor's front door is locked. My immediate assumption was that he must be a drug dealer.



Frank

[Colin Palfrey]

Originally Posted by VinnyBock

Just this morning I was going through my tracking stats and one of my links was clicked from I site I never heard of, I checked it out and there was my original article, with by: Admin under it.
The only reason I let it go, is because it still has my affiliate hyper links in it?

I copy peoples articles from a number of article directories, and this is not a bad thing to you.

I'm not saying I copied your article personally but whoever it was has done you a favor and if you don't like it don't submit articles, to article directories which allow syndication.

On another point though it is illegal to change the article/resource box so you are quite right there.

This is of course assuming someone didn't just take it off your site which is also not expectable.

[Lian]

Did anyone try SideWiki with your email accounts?

It works

Try it and click "publish"

Lian

[Marty S]

Originally Posted by Lian

Did anyone try SideWiki with your email accounts?

It works

Try it and click "publish"

Lian

What do you mean by this? I know it publishes to blogger and such, but how do you sync it with email?

[Lian]

Originally Posted by Marty S

What do you mean by this? I know it publishes to blogger and such, but how do you sync it with email?

Open your email inbox, make a Sidewiki comment and publish. I know it probably won't publish your emails because it requires a login to see your inbox. But it just shows Sidewiki isn't well developed yet.

[R Hagel]

Originally Posted by TheRichJerksNet

You still do not understand eventhough it has been explained to you many times.. I guess if you was to lose your business over this then you would understand.

I think he probably understands. But to agree with or even consider the potential downsides won't help him drive traffic to his sig file and video.

Originally Posted by R Hagel

I think he probably understands. But to agree with or even consider the potential downsides won't help him drive traffic to his sig file and video.

Yeah this is true ....

TO ALL NEWBIES: Pay close attention because what Marty is doing is what you SHOULD NOT do when thinking about marketing.

James

[Kirk Ward]

Originally Posted by R Hagel

I think he probably understands. But to agree with or even consider the potential downsides won't help him drive traffic to his sig file and video.

Figured that early on.

Which is why he keeps the "for" argument going. Maybe someone will count the number of individuals "for" and compare it to the number "against" and see how they compare. I'm too lazy to do that, but would love to know.

But, whether he is using this as a way to drive traffic to his pitch or no, it is somethng we need to be aware of and know how to handle. I like the SSL idea.

K
.

[Marty S]

Originally Posted by TheRichJerksNet

Yeah this is true ....

TO ALL NEWBIES: Pay close attention because what Marty is doing is what you SHOULD NOT do when thinking about marketing.

Thanks James, I respect your opinion.

[R Hagel]

One more thing...

Marty, you may want to have a lawyer review what you're doing with the Sidewiki name now and how you plan to use it in the future (domains, products, videos, etc).

Here, from Google's terms of service that you agreed to when you downloaded the toolbar:

9.2 Unless you have agreed otherwise in writing with Google, nothing in the Terms gives you a right to use any of Google’s trade names, trade marks, service marks, logos, domain names, and other distinctive brand features.

And according to TESS (Trademark electronic search system), Google submitted an application for trademarking Google Sidewiki on Sept 21st.

[DavidO]

Marty, you wouldn't be developing a financial interest involving this new "tool", would you?

Of course that's perfectly legitimate but I can see no other reason why you would defend this horrendous thing Google is trying to foist on us.

[Marty S]

Originally Posted by DavidO

Marty, you wouldn't be developing a financial interest involving this new "tool", would you?

Of course that's perfectly legitimate but I can see no other reason why you would defend this horrendous thing Google is trying to foist on us.

I would love to develop a financial interest in it, if I can figure it out.

[Marty S]

Originally Posted by R Hagel

Marty, you may want to have a lawyer review what you're doing with the Sidewiki name now and how you plan to use it in the future (domains, products, videos, etc).

Here, from Google's terms of service that you agreed to when you downloaded the toolbar:

And according to TESS (Trademark electronic search system), Google submitted an application for trademarking Google Sidewiki on Sept 21st.

Did you really have to look up to see if the name was registered? They may have an issue some day, so they can drop my (Google) blogger page if they feel they must.

[IM Headlines]

Originally Posted by Marty S

I would love to develop a financial interest in it, if I can figure it out.

Develop a financial interest in this 1 tool?

1) I highly doubt that you will make good profits by talking about
sidewiki, spamming your stuff on this tool or whatever...

2) Judging by all of the complaints and controversy that I'm seeing,
this tool will probably hit the dirt.

3) I'm quite sure that someone will rise to oppose this. You see,
all of us complaining together can be useless (unfortunatley) but
when another respectable and big corporation gets involved, well
you know...

GET REAL and focus your marketing efforts on big niches, niches
that actually yeild serious profits...

But, then again it's your call...

[R Hagel]

Originally Posted by Marty S

Did you really have to look up to see if the name was registered?

Nope, of course not. I did so as a means of grabbing their application date (out of curiosity about when they applied).

Since you don't really seem to care about any of this, I'm just bringing this issue up so that beginning marketers don't get the impression that you can just use someone else's trademark in any way they please. Check with a lawyer before dabbling in this sort of stuff.

Some companies don't notice or chase after these infringements. Some (like eBay) have lawyers standing by to send cease and desist notices. And some don't even bother with C&Ds -- they sue.

[Marty S]

Originally Posted by IM Headlines

Develop a financial interest in this 1 tool?

1) I highly doubt that you will make good profits by talking about
sidewiki, spamming your stuff on this tool or whatever...

You may be right, but how do you know right now?

Originally Posted by IM Headlines

2) Judging by all of the complaints and controversy that I'm seeing,
this tool will probably hit the dirt.

Hmmmm... You realize Twitter and Facebook both have one coming as well, right?

Originally Posted by IM Headlines

3) I'm quite sure that someone will rise to oppose this. You see,
all of us complaining together can be useless (unfortunatley) but
when another respectable and big corporation gets involved, well
you know...

This much is obvious.

Originally Posted by IM Headlines

GET REAL and focus your marketing efforts on big niches, niches
that actually yeild serious profits...

But, then again it's your call...

Thanks, I choose to keep an open mind.

[Marty S]

Originally Posted by R Hagel

Nope, of course not. I did so as a means of grabbing their application date (out of curiosity about when they applied).

Since you don't really seem to care about any of this, I'm just bringing this issue up so that beginning marketers don't get the impression that you can just use someone else's trademark in any way they please. Check with a lawyer before dabbling in this sort of stuff.

Some companies don't notice or chase after these infringements. Some (like eBay) have lawyers standing by to send cease and desist notices. And some don't even bother with C&Ds -- they sue.

Yes your trade-mark info is true, but have you noticed how many products with the name "Twitter" are out there.

[R Hagel]

Originally Posted by Marty S

Yes your trade-mark info is true, but have you noticed how many products with the name "Twitter" are out there.

Yes indeed. But if those folks are infringing on Twitter's TM, it doesn't make it ok for anyone else to do so. And those companies who don't pursue it today may decide to pursue it tomorrow -- aggressively.

[CMartin]

Although I think SideWiki has good potential, the truth is that currently there's a lot of potential for abuse by spammers and competitors. If Google does not provide an opt-out, this will turn very fast from SideWiki to SpamQuickly.

Another example of abuse is:
If SideWiki allows to add comments to *any* page, it will not be fun to watch AdWords advertisers (or from any other PPC engine) starting to get on their landing pages a lot of "great" comments - advertisers paying for each click and then have on their landing page the SideWiki feature with full of competitors comments/ads

Carlos

[Kay King]

An increasing number of blogs and SEO experts are bashing this new addition. Two days ago there was little mention of it - today is a different story. And there will be some here who point out the "benefits" in every thread - but if it's also in your signature I'll discount it no matter who you are.

According to good old Matt Cutts, sidewhonker will be useful "for all those crappy make money sites" - no attempt to hide the "google as big brother" agenda, is there? What a great place to post "I bought this ebook and I didn't make any money"....

As I don't have any crappy make money sites, why do I care? Because I have other sites that I've worked long and hard on and I don't care to have some wannabe marketer or lazy competitor bashing my site and sending my visitors to his site instead. And it will happen - is happening.

I liked Michael Grey's comment:

* I need to go lay down between whuffie, sidewiki, and squidoo brand pages - internet stupidity is overwhelming today

kay

[WritingMadwoman]

Another big concern I haven't seen anyone mention yet is inappropriate content. My websites are considered "family friendly". People of all ages can safely view them. Imagine the horrors when youngsters or even sensitive adult visitors encounter spam comments and links related to penis enlargement, illegal drugs, hate messages and who knows what else. Granted, those comments are not "ON" my website, but they are absolutely connected to it. Not good any way you look at it!

Wendy

[HeySal]

Those people in the new google office in The Dalles must be doing even more blow than I had heard was around there.

I don't care if something is ON my website or just shows up with it....I have a family site, too and we took some real long strides to keep it spam and porn free. Now if Google is going to let people post porn links and other adult material in a way that makes it appear that it is on MY site..........I want them to eat it on their own sites and their own dime as well.

[mojojuju]

Originally Posted by WritingMadwoman

Imagine the horrors when youngsters or even sensitive adult visitors encounter spam comments and links related to penis enlargement, illegal drugs, hate messages and who knows what else.

Do you think a significant percentage of your young or sensitive adult visitors will actually be looking at sidewiki comments?