Reject to Reject

Thanks to everyone’s input and private emails about my idea to publish the 4771 articles that we had previously rejected over the past 11 months.

After more consideration, it has become apparant to me that we have become a ‘more trusted partner’ to the search engines by rejecting those 4771 articles as we did not contribute to further littering the Internet with content that didn’t meet our editorial guidelines.

Bottom line: The short-term extra ad-revenue buck is not worth the long-term partner decrease in value that we have with the major search engines. We’ll continue to focus on only accepting quality content that delivers exceptional value to our readers and those who syndicate our articles.


Lance Winslow writes:

In your comments you state that the “Short Term Revenue Buck is not worth the long term decrease in search engine rankings” I agree with that and believe this has been much of the down fall of your competition if you can call them competition. How can we authors be sure that you will be around long term. I see many authors with over 50 articles on your Expert Author Page and they have SIGNIFICANT time and effort and have nearly as much risked. What is the guarantee that EzineArticles is a long term endeavor and that the team has the cash flow and ability to continue? How do we know your team can handle the intense and incredible growth? No one has ever done this before? How do we know you are up for the challenge and the Team is in it to win it? Inquiring minds want to know, especially those of us who watched the DotCom Bubble Burst; We want to know does EzineArticles have what it takes? What is the level of strength of character on your team? Who are they, where are they, what are their personal achievements and can they take us authors to the next step and if we join you and make this happen, can you carry that torch to victory? Come on, Come on. The authors know where we want to go today, can EzineArticles take us there?

Comment provided July 10, 2005 at 2:14 PM


Dina Giolitto writes:

Maybe we ARE the team.

Ask not what can do for you. Ask what you can do for

This hasn’t cost us a dime since December. What in tarnation is the reason for your post?

Comment provided July 10, 2005 at 3:19 PM


Lance Winslow writes:

Dina, Indeed maybe we are the team? If so affirmation is needed for those who press on to put up 50 articles or more.
One has to ask when any high level executive discusses short VS long-term thinking and strategies, you will not find a reporter on MSNBC, Bloomberg or WSJ missing a beat on that comment. For instance in the book; ‚¬“Built to Last‚¬ company’s that had both short and long term thinking simultaneously did well both short and long term. Those with only short term thinking obviously failed as Chris’s post suggests; in his example search engines would probably blacklist the site if it was filled with KWC-key word crap. Yet if a company does not concentrate on also making money, then in fact they cannot continue with their business strategy; I.E. Krispy Kreme recently getting creamed when sales couldn’t cut it. It takes money to grow and therefore no sacrifice short term would be best. That is point number one and reason for the post.
Point number two is that Time=Money in the linear flow of such periods and therefore an author’s time is cost and even if they get value all is lost if the site goes down (at that point value stops), also Chris’s point everyone loses if the de-listing or poor rankings occur. It has cost all author’s time and effort to post articles, that takes away from their core business, sure some are perhaps starving authors like many starving artists, yet no matter what, it takes time. Time that could be spent making money therefore it is an investment. A Return on Investment from the Author’s point of view is important.
What if Chris sells the site and the new site owner changed things around? What if some government agency decided that it violated some law or some lawsuit whether reality based or creative writing took its toll on the company? What if the site stayed in negative cash flow too long and ceased or it was unable to perform with the growth. The more growth the more costs, and if short-term is not being looked at it, it may not be able to continue.

The third reasoning is a re-affirmation of commitment to the mission. A commitment that the site comes first before personal expenditures, lavish vacations or other side tracking additional businesses. A team dedicated to 110% is needed to win. You can never win going half way. If you concentrate only on long term, you will not be prepared for Luck, as you will not be prepared to accept a fluke of opportunity when it presents itself. And the doors of opportunity in the Business Hall often open and you need to be able to look inside the rooms and see what is there.

A forth reason for the submission is merely one of observation and experience so if someone with 50 articles has a lot of time commitment, how about someone with over 1600 (thus personal). The other six reasons have to do with team building, psychological motivation and enjoying the process of discussion, debate and innovation. It about winning really, I like to win and wish to be only surrounded by winners and have found a nice home for my articles on . In it to win it.

Comment provided July 10, 2005 at 6:24 PM


Dina Giolitto writes:

I must apologize for my earlier post, I realize it’s ambiguous. I do wonder, Lance, why you would ask such a series of questions. Are you purposely trying to provoke here? If so, why? If it’s because you want Chris to prove his genuine good intent to the audience, then I believe he has risen to the occasion quite gracefully.

But now you have prompted me to explore the other side; that being, how do Chris and his team know that the AUTHORS are *worth it*? ;)

Lance, you mention authors with “significant time and effort risked:”

What did we authors risk, exactly? Their own time? This service has been free for several months now. How is an author’s taking full advantage of the opportunity to heard on the world wide web a “risk?”, and how is responsible for that? Answer: they’re NOT!

I believe when you sign the disclaimer that comes with your membership account, you automatically agree to assume all responsibility for whatever unforseen complications may occur as a result of your having posted information on this site.

And this question: “What is the guarantee that EzineArticles is a long term endeavor and that the team has the cash flow and ability to continue?”

If I were running this site and someone asked me such a question, I’d turn around and ask them if they’d like to help ensure the cash flow by contributing a monthly membership fee. Really now, when someone GIVES you something, do you ask for MORE?

And about this:

“…can they take us authors to the next step?”

I think the real question is can the authors take themselves to the next step. I believe that’s what it’s all about, yes? Nobody can help you but YOU. How can you even question that they’re somehow expected to float all of us “to victory” as you say? How about an automotive industry analogy: this website is the car. Chris and the team, they’re the gas. YOU, the author, are the driver. The car runs great, but if you don’t get behind the wheel it’s NOT GOING ANYWHERE!

Seems to me that this team is doing a pretty darned good job of running this show. And it seem to me that there are enough quality contributors on this site to make it worthwhile for the people who run it, to keep on running it.

This project, like any project, will be as successful as it possibly can be, if everybody stops worrying about what everybody else is up to and simply concentrates on doing their personal best.

That means, 1. putting your faith in the operators, 2. putting your time and effort into contributing, and 3. putting your complaints aside.

And if it doesn’t work out as you had planned, you get up and walk away. And on your way out, you grab what’s still yours and you plan to invest it elsewhere. Because there will ALWAYS be something to take away.

Comment provided July 10, 2005 at 6:56 PM


Dina writes:

Uh-oh… I just want to say that the timing of my last post is not jiving with the posts that Lance wrote in response to Chris’s and to my first post. Regardless: I think we have all reached the same conclusion that Onward and Upward is the slogan of the day!

Thank you both for such inspiring thoughts!


Comment provided July 10, 2005 at 7:07 PM



Dina said, “Chris and the team, they’re the gas. YOU, the author, are the driver. The car runs great, but if you don’t get behind the wheel it’s NOT GOING ANYWHERE!”

Actually, I think “Chris and the team” is the freeway or distribution hub. Authors are the gas and the car, but the publishers and readers who come to the site are the “driver” because without them, this whole project is pointless.

Lastly, without adwords buyers at Google, everyone would have to pay to play and we most likely would be more like a public relations service provider for a fee rather than the ad-supported tool we are today.

Comment provided July 10, 2005 at 7:15 PM


Lance Winslow writes:

The Car analogy is a good one. Or a bicycle is good too because it involves more human effort and umph! How about a Jet. is your runway, you have been cleared for takeoff; What are you waiting for?

Comment provided July 11, 2005 at 1:17 AM


RSS feed for comments on this post.

Leave a comment

Please read our comment policy before commenting.