isnare is awesome, as for article sphhing software.. tried out content boss but it failed my test.. second and third versions of articles got picked up by copyscape , anyone tried any others??
if all you want to do is 'pass copyscape', just misspell every third word. Guaranteed method. Which is why 'passing copyscape' has nothing to do with whether search engines will regard your article as 'unique'. It always amuses me when people say 'it passed copyscape'. The web is so big nowadays that almost every possible 3-word combination has been used on a page somewhere. Which means that if copyscape worked correctly, NOTHING could 'pass' it. As they use the google API though, their sifting algo is restricted by what google currently has in its index, which is why there are still people who think they have created something 'unique'. It's a nonsense, of course.
if it doesnt pass copyscape.. what chance does it have of passing google? think about it .... if copyscape can identify the content as being duplicate.. or even thinks that that i could potentially be duplicate.. than google knows it's duplicate.. pretty basic thinking
i submit articles to few top article directories only ... like ezinearticles, goarticles, amazines and few more. and got backlinks from it too in Google
google isnt copyscape. copyscape uses a 3 word shingle to find pages containing the same 3 word shingle. google uses a far more complicated algo to determine uniqueness, because, as I already explained, multiple pages will OBVIOUSLY contain the same 3 word shingles. There is a WORLD of difference between 'hunting for copyright infringement' and 'uniqueness'. For example, an article might contain a snippet of text from some other source as a legitimate reference in context. Copyscape will flag that up as 'containing some of your words'. Google will regard it as unique content (as long as it doesn't trip the UC filter for real). As you say, pretty basic thinking.
I just checked my webmaster tools for a gadget site I started recently. To be honest, I just cannot be bothered to spin articles because an automatically spinned article loses any sense and nobody who regards him/herself as a serious webmaster would re-publish a spinned article on their site. So, my findings are that the value of an article doesn't end after the highest PR directory has published it. Several of my articles that went for distribution picked up at least five high-PR directory links and then went on to be republished on an array of lower-PR directories and blogspots. Yes, and this is all within webmaster tools. So, Google regards a multiple links to a certain extent. For example, If I look at my results through Yahoo SiteExplorer, a single article (that's been distributed) shows 50 backlinks and if I look into Webmaster Tools, the same article is credited with 15 backlinks (both high PR and low PR). As you see, there is a difference - 35 links are discounted by Google but that's not something I see as a problem. If what you're saying was true, I'd have only a couple of links and crappy results traffic-wise and rank-wise. To sum it all up: Google is more picky when it comes to links generated by the same article but it is still worth doing because you actually get better results distributing a single human-readable article opposed to an option of submitting a rubbish spinned article to a bunch of unmanned directories with no authority. And to dispel your doubts about the serious companies and SEOs, yes they do article marketing. The main difference is that their link building strategy is consistent and it is backed by a budget and shows diversity. I recently discovered a company that is very big in Australia that does article marketing and even some crappy directory submissions. I was amazed to see a company of this stature to go for free options but then as I explored it further I found that actually not more than 10% of their efforts are freebies. And, let me tell you, the remaining 90% of their link building strategy is so complicated and money-consuming... oh my! But then, this is how you get to #1... Oh yeah, iSnare is my candy!
you nailed it bud good job... article syndication is golden - and the higher quality the article - the better chance it has of getting picked up a lot and generating some quality backlinks similar to those that you reported.. as for content sphinning, big waste of time and money IMO - if you really are too lazy to write a new article then just sphinn it yourself, any sphinner basically just cuts the amount of words fomr 700-400 to make it "unique" and then you have to edit it anyways because it sounds retarded..