Steven Fullman

Always the way, Norm!



Glad you got it working, and many thanks for updating your post.

Best wishes,
Steve

tigerwar

Yeah right Steve,

I also don't chase them and they won't bring you any moolah unless the keywords that you're getting backlinks for are being searched for "in order for items to be purchased" or interesting enough that visitors might click on the adsense or CPA within.
When I say "Definitely YES!", this was regarding "self-aquired" backlinks for PR purposes and not necessarily direct cash, as...PR, a good domain name and 1 good article can very often be worth more than a 1000 articles when Flipping domains.

P.s I think it's quite obvious based on your answeres/statements=personality in the WF, that people find you and not vice versa

Best regards
Tigerwar

dewar32

Just want to add my 2 cents. I just purchased stevens plugin and had a download problem. I would like to say thanks to Steven for all his help and quick replies to my problem. If your thinking about purchasing this plugin for $27 is a no brainer for what this can do for you.
Once again thank you Steven i will be watching for the updates.

Jorge Sampson

Hi Steve,

Just sent you a PM...

Can you please check it and reply to it?



Cheers,

- Jorge Sampson

fated82

Hi Steven,

I have been using the plugin and I will be focusing on one particular website which I will be using PLR articles to rank on the search engine. Beside your plugin, must I change my title so that it's easier for me to rank? Thanks!

Steven Fullman

Hi Jorge

Timezones...Grrr!

Many thanks for your interest. My reply is with you!

Cheers,
Steve

Steven Fullman

Hi,

It's PLR, so you should change whatever you need to...to get an edge. You don't *need* to change the title, but if it gets you a higher rank...why not?



Cheers.
Steve

all4won

Hi Steve,

As a bit of a newbie, your skills kinda make you like the Wizard of Oz, imo. How do you do that stuff?!
Anyway, followed through your thread and posts then went looking for other articles that were free to republish on other products similar to Google Sniper but couldn't find any... presume I was doing something wrong, but in order to "uniquefy" articles, without blatantly nicking someone else's work and reproducing it without permission do you recommend just using PLR? Or is this "free to republish" stuff easier to find than my feeble search for it?

I also assume that if you can find these free to republish articles, then there's no need to "spin" or go looking for PLR in the first place?

Best - Greg

kaizenfer

Hi Steve
I just sent you a PM

Thanks

cliveohagan

Hi Just bought the plugin. Was exactly what I was looking for. Thanks a million.

all4won

Hi Steve,

When you're back/available, please could you reply to my earlier post #1417.

thanks

hollieollo

Hi Tigerwar,
You may remember me from a few months back?
I did say that I would check the SEO of the two sites we were talking about at that time, and I did. I have since moved on to flipping, but I did keep these two sites under constant review.
Here is my report:-
The two sites you may remember, are w3.onlinereview.biz and w3.antiagingproductsreview.net
At the time, the Online Review site was not getting indexed and was basically sandboxed. The other site was getting every article ranked on page #1 of Google every time.
However, now, both sites have disappeared from Google listings. Very occasionally will I get a video listed. I have had other people, better qualified, to check on this. Their suggestion is that Google are either manually reviewing autoblogs, or they have somehow rumbled the plugin.
I only use wp unique on these two sites. I have a number of other sites that I manually post unique content of my own on. I also manually get links from top PR sites by emailing the webmasters either through their websites contact page, or sometimes using Whois to find the contact name and email. Using the latter, I have had two sites recently ranked in Google. One ranked PR2, the other PR3.
In my opinion, Google have changed something about the way they deal with blogs that they suspect are automated in some way and check them manually. This is not just my opinion. I am a member of a number of Flipping forums. Users on there are reporting the same with autoblogging software like WP Robot. There are even suggestions that `Slick Autoposter` which uses RSS feeds, is no longer a viable method for blogs.
All in all, I have come to the conclusion that the old fashioned way is the best to get results in the long term, i.e. Set up a WP blog, use a theme like Thesis that is built around sound SEO practices. Post original content of your own, or paid-for articles. It still seems OK to use a backlink software like Bookmarkwiz, but I augment it by emailing webmasters to reciprocal link. 90% agree usually.
It takes time, but it still seems the only genuine way to get Google to index and then rank your site. Just 15 minutes each day writing a few hundred word article or post.

I know that this is NOT what you, Steve, or the majority on here want to hear, but I am just posting my own experiences for the benefit of members to make their own observations.

tigerwar

Hi Chris,

I think your're missing the point altogether.

WPunique is not a free ticket to get to No.1, but used correctly it can do just that!
I haven't checked all of my keywords at the moment but I can tell you that I initiated a website for the soul purpose of testing wpunique but as I am involved in other concepts at the moment, I simply havent had much time to analyse everthing..

Having said that, I have just checked my site on a few of the keywords with many, many duplicated articles on the competitions websites.

HEY HO...I'm on page one at no.2 and 3 with google and page one with Yahoo. This is without changing/adding/spinning ANY of the content- 0 backlinks -0 social networks and the site is only 4 months old with ONLY DUPE content!

So much to your theory my freind!

The chances of Google maually picking out and controlling a site from approx 50- 100 billion pages on the internet and then one that uses wpunique are almost 0. in fact, I would have more chance of winning the lottery with 6 correct numbers 570 times within a couple of years!

Even if they did, wpunique does NOT change the content that a viewer reads and is therefore NOT deceiving the search engines.

I know for a fact that you asked google to review your site a few times which doesn't help at all when using dupe content and autoblogging.

A site should be registered with one or two unique articles first --then use the autoblogging scripts.
You basically asked google to hold your hand whilst puting it in the fire, I mean no offense Amigo...but walking through the slums with a $1000.00 bill hanging outa your pocket isn't recommended

Btw...I'll be the first to put my hand up here if google degrades the test site!

Best Regards
TW

DarkMatter

I could have kept quite up until I read that sentence.

If I were you I would think how you would justify that statement to Google were they to check you site using this plugin.

Your feeding Googlebot altered content for the purposes of manipulating rankings. Sure it ends up being the same content being displayed to the website visitor, but you are still trying to manipulate the spider into thinking your contents original in some way.

Here is a quote from Google's Webmaster Central "Serving different content to search engines than to users." which is here Cloaking, sneaky Javascript redirects, and doorway pages - Webmaster Tools Help. Now one could debate that your not serving different "content" but it is a direct effort to manipulate the spider and I honestly think you would have a hard time justifying this to Google.

I've also had a hard time understanding how this plugin works to make the content unique if it's so easily translated by the browser. I mean would it not be child's play for the search engine spider to see right through this if that's the case.

tigerwar

Hi DarkMatter,

Thanks, I couldn't have said it better myself!

As WPunique only uses HTML Entity(the same language that google/search engines use to show content) there is no deception.

NONE of your above mentioned are used through Steve's script and If the entire world used HTML Entity then writing normally would be the competition for wpunique.

TW

DarkMatter

Well if you want to explain that to Google should they ever question your use of the plugin go ahead.

Like I said I simply had to challenge your original statement of "not deceiving the search engines". It is a form of deception. We don't live in a world where html entity is a normal way to present content to search engines when publishing content to the web, and with the intent of manipulating rankings.

Best Regards

Steven Fullman

Hi DarkMatter

I totally understand, and agree with everything you say!

If the point was to show the bots something different than the punters...well...I'd have to change the color of my hat.

However, the point of WPUnique is to show the bots AND the punters the same thing...albeit in a slightly different way.

Let me explain...

Computers don't talk in ABC, as you know...it's all 1's and 0's.

And, in their wisdom, some programmers decided there were a few ways we could translate our language into binary code that computers understand.

They settled on a few.

In their wisdom, we called the differences "character encodings".

The most popular is ASCII. But other encodings are still valid, understood, and recognised by all major browsers.

One of which is called "HTML Entities", which WPUnique uses.

At its heart, WPUnique is an ASCII to HTML Entity translator. Translating one computer language to another.

It doesn't break any rules, but even so, it seems that the bots treat the machine code variations differently.

How's that breaking any rules?

If you're not interested in this offer, that's cool.

Tigerwar, however, has invested actual, valuable time and energy into this thread, and has had actual, valuable, tangible results.

Kind regards,
Steve

Steven Fullman

Hi Greg,

Most articles in most article sites are "free to republish" -- it's kind of their business model

They might use different language these days, though.

The *big* point is -- make sure you keep the authors links and bio box intact.

Kind regards,
Steve

Steven Fullman

May I ask why you had to challenge Tigerwar's statement?

He's a big boy, he can make his own decisions, and draw his own conclusions.

As for deception...what are you saying?

Why not talk to me about this? It's my offer after all.

Cheers,
Steve

tigerwar

Hi Greg,

I think everyone is looking for that magic search button, me too!

there are ways though of "shortlisting" your search, such as the following at the bottom of this post...

BUT...be careful using multiple queries in google, they don't appreciate it and will/can ban your IP for around 15minutes or so unless your behind a good proxy and that can be somewhat frustrating....

There's ton of room for imagination regarding altering the following search methods with "including" -"excluding" :"containing" "this |or|that|whatever"

Google Search example:

"may publish this article|guide|content" -"without changing" -"resource box" -"links" -"bio" -"as long as you include" -"its entirety" -"no modification"
---------------------------------------------------------
or

intitle:"how to" site:ezinearticles.com "This article has been viewed 2000..9999999 times" "Article Submitted On: * *, 2010"
---------------------------------------------------------

or

inurl:
------------

etc...etc..

regards
TW

Steven Fullman

Thanks TW

Snap...! I think I said practically the same thing, only less eloquently.

Kind regards,
Steve

DarkMatter

I didn't make it clear what the deception could possibly be? Hmmm, not sure how to elaborate there if you didn't get it.

I have no problem talking to you, but it was TigerWars statement and not yours.

I found TigerWars statement to be extremely misleading for anyone considering the use of the plugin.

Regards

Steven Fullman

Awesome.

I've never spent much time looking at G's search criteria, but you've obviously done your homework.

I should've realised they'd use pipes and wildcards.

It wouldn't surprise me if "grep" was allowed

Cheers,
Steve

tigerwar

I think if you understood exactly what wpunique does, you would be telling a different tale here, but you obviously don't and seem only to be interested in making onesided statements.

that doesn't help anyone and over 3500 satisfied customers appear to prove your assumptions as incorrect.

regards
TW

DarkMatter

I've seen the code changes it makes to the posts, if it helps you to get a clearer picture of my understanding of the software.

I only wanted to bring up my disagreement or at the very least a strong caution over your following statement.

How is my statement anymore onesided than your statement above? I think allowing your comment to sit the way it was is onesided. I simply challenged it. I'm sorry if you don't like it.

Are you allowed to be using claims such as "3500 satisfied customers"? I didn't think this was your product. If you do have authorization to use such claims to justify your position, I'd be more than happy to respond to it.

Your taking this conversation further than it has to go. It's up to you if you want to continue.

Regards

tigerwar

Hi DM,
I have absolutely no grudge against people discussing the SE aspects/perspectives of any product but tere is a suttle difference between experience and assumptions.

I purchased wpunique, have test it in a blatent way and have discussed the internal machinery with Steve and others along it road of evolution.
You haven't and hence my comment "onesided". You are simply making a statement about what google say about certain topics, which do not involve the machinery of wpunique. Therefore you are simply "assuming it's outcome"

I am sure if Steve finds it necessary to fullfil your wishes regarding confirming the sales quantity, he will do so! would you have preffered me to say 3026 or possibly 3922, it really plays no roll whatsoever.
Fact is, there are a handfull (not even full) that couldn't come to terms with purpose and utilization of wpunique, which in turn underlines the statement.

Best regards
TW

DarkMatter

So it's apparent that your "experience" has told you nothing about the fact that trying to manipulate search engine spiders can get your site banned if discovered. I don't have to assume anything about that, and anyone wanting to debate that has had their head in the sand.

Your comment about not NOT deceiving the search engines is irresponsible and misleading to people dying to increase their search engine rankings with "unique" content.

I guess I need to add that I'm not assuming it's outcome for heavens sakes. I'm simply disagreeing with your point blank statement about not deceiving Google.

Go and get Googles official position on how they view the underlying code produced by this plugin and then get back to me.

Regards

cindyt

Wow this is a heated thread and confusing. It's hard to know who is the owner at times. I have purchased this plugin and am obviously one of those people who doesn't understand it. I have now disabled it on all my sites as it seemed to do more harm than good, however it may be my lack of experience. It's very difficult to bookmark anything or use the feeds due to the encoding showing up everywhere. Am I counted in one of the 3500 satisfied customers since I haven't complained?

How many others of the 3500 are like me and put it aside as too much time wasted and moved on?

I wish that I had better success though as it appears that some people know how to use it properly and are having success.

PS Is the December 19th update in the future or past?

cindyt

If you are using Adsense on these sites Google don't need to manually pick a site, website owners dob websites in if they look MFA.

serekesh

Just plug in. Steve, thank you for great tool.

tigerwar

It appears that your crystal ball is doing overtime Mr. Wand.

We "normal" guys are only able to speak about this product based on the past and present results. I can say without assumtions that this plugin is working in our favour at present.

I'm affraid I don't have access to your fortune telling capabilities, how do you do that, I'm amazed. would you be so kind and tell us the football rersults for next year, that would be most appreciated.


I will not try to assume myself capable of predicting the future of any product(as you are attempting to do) that is ridiculously misleading and somewhat ignorant IMHO.
Since the product entered the market, it has helped many people to achieve their long sought goals and you won't find a single post in this forum claiming that WPUnique is the answere to the long term future, rather you'll find posts relating to "use with caution", "better not use it on Authority blogs" "nobody is in a position to predict how google will change it's rule in the future" etc...etc..

At the moment wpunique is not breaking any rules by means of deception

If we all thought as pessimistcally as you apparently do, we'd never try any new methods offered.
Products will always be confronted with a necessity to change and adjust to new regulations. This is expected, hence the reason for so many new products hitting the market.

Wpunique may be good for the next month or the maybe the next 20 Years, only google knows that, but the past and present show that this is not being penalized and therefore not being categorized as a deceptive method.

Instead of nitpicking on singular definitions without FULLY understanding the machinery, I would suggest you purchase the product and come back with some solid experience rather than half-hearted assumptions and accusations of encouraging under false pretenses.

TW

tigerwar

Hi cyndy,
I use adsense on all of my sites and regarding these recent posts,...also on the test site designed souly for testing wpunique and it's doing just fine(see above post).
I did notice a google dance for about 1 month on one of the keywords and almost 7 weeks on the other, but the same keywords are now ranking page 1 on google and yahoo.

Who really knows what the future will bring..maybe DarkMatter will prove us all wrong, but at the moment I can only consider the past facts and present results.

best regards
TW

DarkMatter

I won't reply to the "normal" comment as it will further degrade this conversation, and I don't wish to go there.

You have made a statement that the plugin is "not deceiving Google". Your crystal ball must be at least as good as the one you claim I have, if not better .

I'm not interested in how the plugin produces the underlying code. I'm not a programmer. I do however have a great deal of experience with various types of marketing software, tools, and plugins and quite frankly enjoy trying out the latest and greatest immensely.

This all started when I read your comment that claimed the plugin is NOT in capital letters deceiving Google. I'll say it again. That's irresponsible and misleading as it gives the impression of no risk, given the fact your feeding the search engine spiders alternate code to manipulate them.

Where did you ever come to the conclusion I haven't had hands on experience with the plugin?

Not once have I said don't buy this plugin and I have no intention of making any type of comment on that. If people buy the plugin and find it works for them, that's great.

I did however feel that your comment this whole conversation started over was a concern.

Regards

tigerwar

Ok DarkMatter, I think we could continue this circle indefinitely and get nowhere very fast...

Let's try to conclude the situation

1. you state that the program IS deceptive.
2. You State that google penalizes programs that deceive.

3. One automatically reads due to 1+2 that you believe the program has no future and is/could be doing people more harm that good.

Conclusion: These are all assumptions

1. I state that wpunique is using a common computer language that google use themselves and is therefore NOT deceptive
2. My test sites are are based on present results and are NOT being penalized, au contraire, google is promoting them to the top.

3. I believe the program has a good future and used correctly, people can only benefit from it

Conclusion: 1+2+3 are based on Present FACTS.

You see DarkMatter, as long as the fact are possitive, why try to assume the opposite.

I have already stated that I'll be the first to raise my hand if the future tells a different story and I will produce a monthly outline for everyone to see after a period of one year, in July next year, or sooner, be it a negative balance.

I think that should be proof enough.

But this still will not tell us how google will react in three years.

All the best
Regards
TW

DarkMatter

I disagree in what your saying here, but that's the way it's going to continue it appears.

We've both had a chance to comment.

It is time to finish.

Best Regards,
DM

Steven Fullman

Hi DarkMatter,

I really appreciate your comments. Honestly.

This is what the Warrior Forum is all about! Passionate opinions.



Thank you!

And TigerWar -- what can I say? Your enthusiasm is infectious! You're a great friend, and an amazing guy.

Thank you!

Best wishes,
Steve

seeksuccess

looks good....i'll bookmark it!

Steven Fullman

Hi Cindy,

I've PM'd you, but after I did so, I noticed the above.

The encoding shouldn't show up in feeds/bookmarks, or anywhere else for that matter...

Is it possible you don't have the latest version (2.7)?

Kind regards,
Steve

Ricardo75

Hi Steve,

Quick question, is there a general setting that would allow to use wpunique with each post when its posted? On the first video I see you manually click the option for wpunique to work its magic, but since I use an wprobot plugin to automatically create posts, I wondered if wpunique could work automatically each time wprobot creates a post. That way I wouldn't have to manually go in an click the wpunique option with each post. Is that possible?

Warmly,

Ricardo

Avatar1728

Hi Steve
i would like to know the answer to the above question too!
I have a couple of autoblogs that pulls in mainly amazon feeds etc and was wondering if WpUnique is ok to use with them too.
Sorry if this question has already been answered in this thread.. I did start to to read it but there are far to many posts, it would take an age to read! :p ... I guess it goes to show how popular WpU is!

Thanks for your time.

hollieollo

Hi Tigerwar,
Thanks for the reply. I was a little taken aback by the tone of your response. I was not intending any `slight` against the plugin, merely reporting what has happened using it over a long period of time.
Just to get the facts right, yes I did ask Google whether the site had been sandboxed. This was a perfectly legitimate question and I do not see how that was asking them to "hold my hand"? What do you mean by that?
More importantly, my other site using this plugin was having its articles on page #1 every time they were published. So it was not the original website that you had been looking at for me that I was talking about.
I have read and heard recently that Google IS looking at autoblogs where they suspect that they are using autoblogging software. We all know that there are footprints that give this away. The manual checking is when these sites are flagged up.
The point I was trying to make and was expecting a proactive answer to, was why is it that a website that has successfully used wp unique for months suddenly disappears from the radar? Articles that previously went to page #1 in hours, now do not appear anywhere in the SERPs?
Has anyone else had this experience?
Remember that I bought the plugin and had success with it at first, so there is no way I was not using it properly.
The fact is that I tried it, had success, now it does not seem to be working. I am entitled to query why that is.
Moreover, I have found that building a blog and taking the time to post unique articles, bookmark them and get links manually by contacting webmasters directly, has gievn me PR ranking that will last, so that is my experience and I would recommend it to newbies.
Frankly, the moral argument between you and Dark Matter above holds little water for me, as people have been using auto spinners and the like for years to use other peoples articles and re-hash them into 30%+ unique articles that pass Copyscape, so whats the difference?

tigerwar

Hi Chris,

When I checked your site a few months back for you, none of your keywords were ranking and one of the main problems were that you were continuously having to re-suibmit your site due to SEO descrepancies. Last but not least you were pulling in too many articles too quickly and then re-submitting having changed the XML sitemap which in turn lead to the search engines to not knowing what to look for(404 errors). You were collecting articles and feeds at a pace that made it obvious to SEs that your site was driven by a script.
If I remember correctly you had somewhere around 280 keywords within a month or so.
When I said "putting your hand in the fire" ... you asked them to review your site whilst still running the autoblogging scripts.
That's basically asking them outright to degrade your site. The entire site should have been deleted of posts and then resubmitted with a new XML sitemap and one or two pages of unique content. That would have given you a fresh start to reposting the deleted articles at 5-7 per week(human-like).

Basically and IMHO, your site has been branded.

As I said to DM, if WPUnique if used correctly(that means, promoting your site correctly) then there are no problems.
Your problem was not wpunique, rather the way you were using the autoblogging scripts.
My "tone" was honestly tainted with a touch of sarcasm. This was because we'd already spent a few weeks back in June/July, discussing the problems regarding your site and your post yesterday, seemed(at least to me) to be pointing the finger at wpunique although it's fairly evident that the problem is elsewhere.

You said yesterday:

"Their suggestion is that Google are either manually reviewing autoblogs, or they have somehow rumbled the plugin"

well yes.....you asked them to review your "autoblogs".

Best regards
TW

Steven Fullman

Hi

Yes of course!

Once activated, you really don't have to lift a finger.

All your new posts will be "uniquified"...although you can disable the "uniquification" on a post-by-post basis if you wish.

I hope that helps.

Kind regards,
Steve

hollieollo

Hi Tigerwar,
Everything you say is correct. However, I am not talking about that website. I accept that out of desperation, I asked Google why the site was being sandboxed. However, that site is now getting traffic so I am not particularly bothered about about the autoblogging or wp unique on that site.
It was the other site that has suffered recently. The one that was until a month ago getting to #1 in Google within hours.
Strangely, since I spoke to you a few days ago, the articles have started to appear on page #1 again? How odd is that?
Whether Google are onto autobloggers can be argued until we are all blue in the face, however, as has been stated in very early posts in this thread, anyone finding that their articles are being relegated by `apparently` duplicate content that appears AFTER theirs is published will almost certainly query it.
I have experienced this myself with people blatantly plagiarising my Ezine articles. I have had their ISPs remove their content or Google have de-indexed their sites, so I guess that this is a possible cause of Google intervention.

tigerwar

The only thing you're experiencing IMHO is something that happens to everyone..."the google dance".
You can expect that to happen a couple of times within the first year with new sites and sometimes(if your unlucky) for longer periods, 4-6 weeks-even with the best on-page SEO.
There can be many reasons for that but you'll never get a 100% answere as to why. I could list you 4 or 5 possible reasons that are perceived by webmasters but whether they're factual or not is left to the imagination. No-body that I know of, with the exception of when google started their Caffeine project, has really ever given a plausible reason for the "dance"

Nevertheless, anyone playing with scripts might (at some time or other), be playing with fire and when the "dance" takes effect and something negative does actually happen, the finger is often and too easily pointed in the wrong direction.
This is why it's always advisable to "play around and perfectionize" with content automation for a while, on a non-important blog to see what happens.

All I can say, is that I am playing around and getting great results with automation and WPunique. In fact, I'm getting great results and destroying them trying new things out...it's a game!

My advice is pretty simple...

Don't put all your eggs in one basket...always have a reserve, a Plan A,B,C,D and E or you might become disappointed.The idea behind using autoblogs or whatever kind of time saving scripts, is mainly having the possiblity of growing a small network that can be monetized with the least human effort-in the shortest possible time- but it should never be your only or main source of income, google changes it's rules and regs far to often to be able to rely on those as a sustainable business model.

Oh and one more thing....I put an emphasis on the word "play", put the sites up, do a little tweaking and see what happens, but don't waste your precious time on them, analyse them once a month,tweak the necessary and get on with your real job, in your case flipping domains or whatever it may be.

Best regards
TW

tigerwar

hi f82,
Pulling in plr is the easiest thing, but I've seen a lot of PLR where the SEO=0, so it is worth changing the on-page SEO to your keywords like:-Titel-h1-h2-italicized-intro-conclusion-url...I have lots of plr that i change for obvious reason(too old- no longer relevant etc...but the context doesn't seem to vary that much) and there's no point in trying to rank for a page that is filled with old, dupe content on page one and is no longer relevant to the market. You might feel good getting to no.1, but it won't monetize---find relevant(hot topics) and adjust your plr KEYWORDS accordingly, then let wpunique do the rest, and regarding holliello's comments above...don't worry about people complaining, changing 6 phrases in a PLR for autoblogs is a 10 minute thing. So do it and see what happens(at least this is my opinion and it seems to work for me), results can come quickly and some take a little longer, rarely do people complain about your article toping theirs...the majority simply see their's going down and try to top yours or in fact don't do anything at all..it's easy to become paranoid.......do it, forget it, do the next etc...

best regards
TW

industrial

Hollie - Can you PM me the email offer you are sending to these webmasters. Getting 90% to agree or even 25% would be quite impressive. I would really like to see the email you are sending them. Thanks

chattervine

hello steven, how can i fix this?

jeffo42

Hi Steve,
Just purchased your fantastic plugin before you close off.
I am trying to get on top of using XSP at the moment and then will turn to complimentary WP blogs, where I will be using this incredible plugin of yours.
Probably will have an upgrade or two before I go to use it.

Apart from great responses in this forum I found tremendous support for your product from some respected independent reviews.
Thanks again.
Neil

Steven Fullman

Hi,

Glad you ended up back on page 1 Ace!

I must contend a couple of points...

If you write an article, and I republish it...and throw a few backlinks at it...you will almost certainly be relegated to the supplemental pages.

Sorry about that, and welcome to the link economy.

Google ranks popularity over originality. Being first means nothing. Being popular, everything.

Plagiarism is a strong word, and needs context.

If you mean they stole your article without credit, or they removed your links...that's plagiarism.

If they used your article to better their rankings, whilst keeping your links intact...that's not plagiarism. That's feeding the economy.

Good for you for ratting out the former, but if you publish to article directories you are exposing your content to syndication (that's kind of the point)...but -- of course -- syndication must include attribution.

Cheers,
Steve