Comments on: Eliminating the Scam Pest

By: Chinmay Chakravarty

Chinmay Chakravarty — Thu, 29 Oct 2009 13:31:18 +0000

Hi Lance! Come home to Mumbai! It’s full of thoughts for food!

By: Marte Clif

Marte Clif — Thu, 29 Oct 2009 06:44:32 +0000

Well, not everyone makes a pig of themselves when it’s free… and obviously not all of us went wild with keywords in the resource box.

It’s just that some people are such jerks.

Call me dumb, but I still think they’re in the minority.

By: Lance is in the House!

Lance is in the House! — Thu, 29 Oct 2009 06:16:27 +0000

Chinmay, I liked your “food” analogy, unfortunately it has made me very hungry.

By: Chinmay Chakravarty

Chinmay Chakravarty — Thu, 29 Oct 2009 05:54:22 +0000

The latest rule about taking in resource box texts into the article word count was made due to the misuse of the keyword density limit. Some had included too many keywords in resource box texts to counter the limit set for articles.

Now, who is taking advantage of whom? Rules need to be changed just because of this–this being valid not only for EZA, but for all law making bodies.

There is another general rule! One eats normally at normal times, but when a meal is provided free of cost one devours!

By: Marte Clif

Marte Clif — Tue, 27 Oct 2009 19:40:28 +0000

Scott – This is a free service. If you don’t like it, don’t use it! No one is taking advantage of you – no one is forcing you to submit your articles. So just don’t.

I agree with Terry – don’t you have something better to do with your time?

By: Martin - Security.

Martin - Security. — Tue, 27 Oct 2009 19:38:04 +0000

“In the article, I will discuss how they take advantage of their authors, switch rules after the fact, and are generally worthless considering nobody reprints articles.”

Hi Scott,

I don’t think anyone is being taken advantage of, nobody is compelled to submit articles to EzineArticles.

And if nobody did reprint articles there would be no point in submitting anywhere.

By: Jerry Smith

Jerry Smith — Tue, 27 Oct 2009 19:33:28 +0000

Classy response Chris. Nobody likes to have something they have done in the past apparently questioned and the rules changed, but it essence sometimes this happens in an overall effort to raise standards for everyone.

Anyone who has made serious use of Ezine Articles knows that these changes are NEVER personally aimed at a single writer, but are the response to certain trends.

By: terryweber

terryweber — Tue, 27 Oct 2009 19:20:22 +0000

Obviously, you must have something better, more constructive, positive and helpful to do with your God-given time and talent!

By: Keith Elliott

Keith Elliott — Tue, 27 Oct 2009 19:17:23 +0000

Scott:

That is, of course, your privilege.

A couple of questions, if I may.

How many articles do you have up at EzineArticles, and how many rejections?

It sounds as though you are not happy with this valuable, free service.

Keith

By: Christopher M. Knight

Christopher M. Knight — Tue, 27 Oct 2009 19:15:03 +0000

Scott,

That’s kind of mean spirited…coming from a Platinum author.

I looked at your articles:
http://ezinearticles.com/?expert_bio=Scott_F._Carlson

Quite a few nice articles. I am a soccer coach myself for the past 4 years.

Back to the issues:

We will ALWAYS raise quality standards every single month. If we don’t, the site becomes worthless.

You are wrong to assume that nobody is clicking on the links in the resource box. We deliver 200,000+ clicks EVERY SINGLE DAY to our 200k members. Most members report a 7-12% click through rate! That’s pretty awesome.

I knew we’d have some unhappy members as each quality standard raised means someones’ articles are not being accepted as they might have been previously.

I’m open to a further debate of the issues if you are.