I wanted to put Carson to ease on one issue… he mentions:
“Instead, I am concerned about squeeze page-reliant clients and other with whom I have worked on articles experiencing decreased effectiveness from their campaigns due to a failure to adjust to EzineArticle’s eventual adjustments.”
To be clear, the only landing page quality metric that we’re actively rejecting articles for are links that are dead. I don’t think that’s too unreasonable to expect that a brand new article submissions should have a valid link that works when clicked on… but we do frown on authors who put a ‘parked’ domain in their resource box because that adds no value to our users when they click on the URL in the authors resource box.
Many had a field day complaining about my entry on how I was proposing that resource box website link standards should be raised (63 comments, many of them negative)…and even though I did a follow up to that post to reassure everyone of our intentions; It really seems to me that few are thinking about this issue from our end-users perspective (something that we obsess about improving) or the perspective of making those who refer traffic to us, to look good for having done so.