Too bad you don't place much stock in Wiki; this page describes you to a tee: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_ignorance
I would never lower myself to personally insulting you sir. There's just no need to go there at all. We can honestly argue our beliefs here in proper spirit. No, I do not place much stock in Wiki. Are you familiar with how Wiki works, and how easy it is to state anything you want in it? If so, how could you allow wiki to define anything for yourself?
This "what is an MFA site" is like the "what is spam" argument. Some people think spam is sending me ANYTHING I didn't specifically request, whereas some people think having someone opt into your list is carte blanche to send anything and everything you want so it's only spam if they haven't signed up for your list. With the MFA argument, I think a lot of you are looking at the situation from the wrong end. You're saying it's an MFA site if someone set up the site with the purpose of making adsense income. In Google's eyes, it's an MFA site when it provides nothing useful from the web surfer's POV. In other words, a site that's all scraped content and links, plus adsense is an MFA. A site with original content might very well be a really crappy site, but it's not an MFA site. Google can't judge how good your content is, just that there is content.
What? I didn't insult anyone. Did you read the link? You were using an "argument from personal belief " and I called you on it. This is a false argument in debate. Just because "You know what MFA sites look like" doesn't mean you know what an MFA site is. True, anyone can post anything on Wiki, but I'll take their collaborative agreement about the defintion of a term rather than what a few people post in a forum.
If you buy 50 99 cent .info domains from Godaddy. Research for low competition keywords. Put some type of content on them. Buy some 3 way links, you can make 1-10 dollars a day for awhile on your 50 sites. But you have to keep rebuilding. Most sites with adsense on them are made for adsense (MFA); otherwise why did they put adsense on them.
I find all the people struggling to define MFA rather amusing; some as if there is some holy grail definition that others are failing to understand, others some kind of Adsense zen - "if we build a site and put Adsense on, then surely the site is built for Adsense?" asked the young novice monk. "You have much to learn." replied the master, in his usual I know better than you nerdish sarcastic fashion...
Well thank you. I also have a really crappy MFA site using content from Google news (relatively unique, but still copied content) with a PR4 home page. I have PR growing out my ears I will add that MFA site despite having over 20K posts makes pennies from AdSense which is really crap for a PR4 home page, 209 backlinks in Google (which reminds me must remove them), 12,000 pages indexed in Google from a 30K+ page site (was 20K last time I checked, must turn that script off as well!). I could easily build 100 of these sites without too much trouble and make enough money to make it worthwhile, but I don't like sites like this and can do much better in the same amount of time with far fewer resources needed. BTW from my one test (I test all sorts of stuff like this) I can say adding lots of links to a MFA site using copied content is a waste of links. Google will catch the site for what it is and those links will be wasted. David Law
If your referring to my last post, I wouldn't advise doing it that way, I was just saying I can understand why some go that way, I wouldn't call it easy work, but it's not particularly skilled either all you need is a few basic tools and a little common sense and you can create 10K+ sites with hardly any real work. BUT they are crap content and Google can easily spot them and filter them. When I test something I don't do a half arsed test either, I think things through. For example I used Google news RSS feeds for the content because by choosing a search phrase in Google groups I could get relatively unique text (I didn't copy Wikipedia or scraped thousands of sites which is known to be a failure). I then ran some basic changes (automated) to the content so it made it a little more unique. Despite this effort the site failed to live up to what you'd expect from a PR4 home page and 20K+ pages (this site has enough aged links to do quite well). Even if the individual posts pages are just copied content from news reports, the way it was gathered is relatively unique and so the categories are unique combinations of this text. All failed to pass Google's algo. This told me Google is VERY good at spotting and penalising sites like this and so in the first instance they are a complete waste of backlinks and do not make much money from AdSense (about $2 this month which is terrible). If your making a site like this for AdSense reasons it's not a good idea. Despite not killing me in bandwidth terms from visitors, it's still going to be regularly spidered by Googlebot etc... which is going to be a drag on resources for little return. I pay for a dedicated server, it's not got unlimited bandwidth or unlimited ability to handle Googlebot etc..., when I had a server with 500MB of memory the server bottle necked on memory (Apache kept crashing, apparently the first thing to crash when memory is limited). Got 2 GB now, but I don't want to waste it on sites like this with $2 a month returns! So yes, you could make hundreds of these sites and make money, but there are far better ways to make money online and so I won't be setting up hundreds of crap MFA sites that waste my resources for little profit when I spend far less time on a quality site and make much more revenue. I can make more money from one quality page in a DAY through affiliate marketing (which is far from the best way to make money online) than a site like that a year from AdSense. So I know where I'll be spending my time. David Law