Buying/Selling of Weight

The sites would have to be registered and approved by the co-op before you could point links/ads to them.


Why would that be so hard?

Is it hard to pull a WHOIS on websites to see who the owners are?

 

I don't see how that is really any different than buying weight though... If someone paid me to join the network and gets to place their ads in the account, its the same as buying the weight. The only difference is it wouldn't allow vetern members to sell theirs.

(I am not being argumentative, only posing questions.)

 

if it becomes viable to buy / sell weight then i'd most likely just remove my self from the co-op, as there then becomes a issue with the legiability (sp) of the ads and whos doing what etc.

I believe that if you give people the option to buy/sell weight then its no more a co-op its just a race to build a shit load of pages to get weight to sell, then it just turned into a webring of crapness.

If you give people the option then they will abuse it.

- Edit: This is why i believe you should only be able to link ads to urls in your account(s). Afterall, this is all about giving and recieving, you get what you give.

 

That’s a much clearer, succinct and direct version of what I was trying to say. Thank you.

-jay

 

I see your point Shawn- that is something I hadn't really thought about..

Another Question: Even with "artificial" boosting of the pages, it would still be delivering ads. People would need to wait for PR updates, and content to be added to the index before the weight would increase.

Keep in mind I really think weight is more valuable than any of the sales I've seen to date.

 

schlottke its not about that at all, its about the quality of sites that link that give the pr...

if your site links to mine and has nothing but, i dunno, chinese stuff on it, then the PR boost to my site is negliable.

i.e, if you have 10,000 backlinks to your site, thats only a pr or 4 or 5 at most, even with 100,000 backlinks.

Its not about the quanity but the quality and relevents of those links that are incoming / outgoing to the pages content etc.

PR is all about relavents, unrelavent backlinks can only get you so far.

To also emphasise on what i said before about only linking to sites in your account(s), this would also allow to build a much better site check, to make sure the accounts are upto par so to speak.

 

buyofflift

I will have to say I totally disagree with you on links thing

 

There are categories for each link that will be implemented shortly, and languages as well.

PR is not about related content at all. I have pages holding PR6/7 with only one link from a totally unrelated page.

Quality and Quantity both play a part in the SERPs, you'd be nuts to think many unrelated links won't help as much as a few related links will.

The quality of the network needs to be watched over, but realistically google should be removing the pages that show no usefullness anyway, so a lot of the job is already done for those people managing the co-op links.

 

There are benefits to having a small amount of weight as opposed to a large amount of weight. I don't have an overly large amount of weight for any of my 7 sites - if you knew my total weight you'd probably be surprised. The smaller weight sites still get a benefit. I don't want the small sites to have a huge amount of weight: don't wanna scare the search engines. If you have a site with only a few pages; then it only makes sense not to over do on the weight.

Where the more weight more weight comes from I don't know. I'm not doing well because I have gobs of weight. It's how I *use* that weight.

I've got a really cool whip I could use......

 

How many members does the coop network have? I think it is ridiculous that only 53 people have voted, that shows that the rest are people that don't give a damn about the network or the forum

 

Not every view to the thread will vote, some are guests that don't care, many are duplicate views by the same member who could have already voted.

Plus I think the opinions are much more important than the votes.

 

So if the voting continues as is and weight isn't available for rent, what is there to do with the un-needed weight? Let's say I calculate that I only need 10,000 of Coop weight to achieve #1 for my keywords and I have 45,000 of weight. The other 35,000 goes to what? There is NO way to only get 10,000 coop weight since the ads need to be on ALL pages of the directory on down. I wouldn't call renting excess weight greed. I would think of it more as helping someone else who needs the weight for his/her keyword to rank as well as I'm ranking for mine and as most of us would probably do, we WOULDN'T give our weight away if we know someone out there is willing to pay for it.

 

I would say that the bottom line for co-op members is the value and effect of the co-op--it's a black box, and all we're concerned with is what comes out of it.

What comes out of it is ads with links. So our concern, as members, is, it seems to me, unaffected by how any particular ad/link got into the network. Our concern is that the ads that display, and perhaps substantially more critical, the sites (not just the exact pages) that they link to. The ads are easily monitored. Even the links are not much more effort than the ads. But it will be ever more important that the entire site to which a linked page belongs haveno qualitiy (or lack of quality) that would significantly bother a visitor to a "sending" site in the network.

If a co-op link carried on one of my sites links to a page that in itself is fairly harmless but belongs to a site that has significant "bad" (take that as you will) content, I'm unhappy; if not, I'm happy.

The end.

 

I suspect that the lack of participation is due to the holidays.

We'll know by the end of next week either way (If Shawn runs the poll that long).

Must be nice to have a life?

-jay

 

Holidays? What is that?

 

Holidays are those days that you used to get before you became self employed. They are now just a myth, like spring break, summer vacation, and weekends.

 

Not sure, but shouldn't there be a third option in the poll "It should be allowed conditionally".... the condition being that the site serving the ads must be a real site with real content and not just a mass of pages created to gain weight. Another condition being that the agreement between the buying and selling parties should not be done publicly in the form of an auction etc.... so not to give it that "spammy feeling". Maybe the reason why alot of people are not replying, is they would have chosen this third option had it been there.. cuz if you ask me about the two options mentioned in the poll, I would say neither.

Presently IMO the two options in the poll do not exaust the posibilities.

Cheers.

 

I think about it like this. You cant 'buy in' to the co-op unless you buy the weight from an existing member. That doesnt make sense.

I see sig ads everywhere for the co-op, even im guilty of it.

Yup - starting to become spammy.

If there is going to be a sale of weight, I think it should be between invested members of the coop only. People should be involved in the site and in the co-op, not just 'use' the free service for their own financial benefit.

I think hiding the numbers is a bad idea. In fact, I would advocate a formula anyone can check to ensure their weight is correct. This isnt because I doubt shaws system