Thursday, July 24, 2008

SEO Community in TailSphinn

I tried to support Sphinn's efforts by putting the SphinnIt button on my site to help raise awareness of what they were trying to do with something unique for the SEO community.

Unfortunately, Sphinn devolved into a bunch of Sphamm and when one of their members pointed out how widespread the problem was they banned Edward. OK, Edward (pageoneresults) can push the envelope a little but it wasn't out of disrespect, he was making a very public spectacle to get them off their dead asses to fix the problem.

So EvilGreenMonkey of Sphinn even admitted Edward was right:

The person highlighted in Aaron's post has had their account terminated, there is no need to interact with them further. The findings highlighted in his comments were not new or truely condemning. Yes, people spam Sphinn - we remove the spam. Yes, submit.php URLs were getting indexed - although from Google indexing WP social media plugin links rather than spamming. Fixes to these problems were either already implemented or scheduled for release before said user started his campaign. I'll make no further comment on this post and suggest that we leave it at that.
So instead of saying "Thank you for bringing it to our attention" and "We're working on the problem" with a proposed implementation date, they just ban him and that's when all hell broke loose in the SEO blogosphere.

No only that, shouldn't the Sphinn members get an apology from Sphinn for forcing us to suffer through all that Sphamm which one simple NOFOLLOW would've stopped from the beginning?

Perhaps Sphinn bears some of the blame here because if "his comments were not new or truely condemning" then you allowed the situation to continue unabated until one of your members simply couldn't take it anymore.

So Sphinn members had to put up with Sphamm for a year and not even a simple apology but they shot the messenger that finally snapped, good going Sphinn.

Right on the heels of this they decide to take a swipe at Kimberly Bock and threatened to ban her for some hypocritical horseshit.
1. Your flame post submitted by another user, which went Hot on Sphinn, was removed due to 26 Desphinns and many complaints.
2. The posts about your personal life had no internet marketing relevance and are seen as off-topic/spam.
So let's review Kimberly's plight as she was a) threatened over a post that someone else submitted to Sphinn and b) claiming that 2 SEOs getting married isn't news.

Holy mother of horseshit, have they lost their minds?

I find their current heavy handed reputation management tactics too autocratic to support Sphinn anymore simply because the good of the community isn't being served when criticism is swept under the rug and attempted to be squelched instead of addressed.

The Sphinn button is off my site because I certainly wouldn't want to be associated with all the vapid top 10 lists being submitted and I sure as hell don't want someone yelling at me about material on my site not being suitable in the event someone else Sphinn's it, such as happened to Kimberly.

Maybe someday if Sphinn gets their act together and stops shooting the messengers and they improve the quality of their content, the SphinnIt button will return.

Until that day, SphuckIt!

5 comments:

Ban Proxies said...

SEO community ..... Bill ventures into the world of "Oxymorons"

SEOs are mercenaries, for a period of time some may have common goals. The time period isn't eternity and many do have backup tactics for unknown but, foreseeable events. Of course "Spham" is accepted while the goals are acceptable. When goals collide some resort to being "split cheeks" or, what ever it takes to mask the true use of what they are trying to prop up as a "community".

I better leave it at that

IncrediBILL said...

I didn't state it in the original post but the very concept of Sphinn even baffles me because what other industry actually has competitors that promote each other?

Look at the list of who's Sphunn the articles, it's almost always top tier SEO's Sphinning other SEOs.

Maybe it's simply peer review.

Mostly I think it defies description.

Kimberly Bock said...

Good morning :-)

One of the things that bothers me most, is the fact that they don't stand by their own "What's Sphamm" page.

You know..the one you read before registering:

"Why Sphinn? We liked the idea of a place where marketers could put their own spin on news by commenting on stories or having discussions"

Uh, so they want to hear 'our own spin on things' ey?

Uh, yea, der, ok.

Unpopular opinion when it involves a prominent Sphinner is grounds for thrashing, bashing, hate mail sent out behind the scenes to bring out the 'twisted sister herd' designed to gangbang you into submission. Desphinning, down-voting, and beatings...Mods anywhere? Uh..yup. They're Desphinning, down-voting and throttling too.

^&%^$**!

They might as well say, "We love hearing your own spin on things, as long as it falls within our *ss kissing guidelines..You know, the unspoken/unwritten rules of conduct manipulation."

Oy. :-)

Anonymous said...

This same behavior is observed in all online communities. People engage in petty power politics and generally act like a bunch of chimps beating each other up, flinging feces, and so forth.

This is the general behavior observed when civilized restraints are removed from a bunch of primates, nearly-hairless or otherwise, of course.

barbiepurl said...

You have said spham is accepted when goals are acceptable.Actually what it means.
-------------------
Barbie Purl
SEO