Is Squidoo In The Throes Of Death?

I have been successfully making money online using Squidoo in addition to my own websites and blogs.

Recent changes brought about by a slap from Google have meant lots of modifications to some lenses being required.  "Shopping cart" lenses are heavily frowned upon by HQ.  Well, guess what!  Most of my lenses are "shopping cart" lenses.  NOT just lists of products but I do use images to encourage my customers to click through to the relevant affiliated website.

Of well over 200 lenses I got about 25 flagged.  Of those 25 I deleted 6 because they were just not performing and I didn't feel that the time it would have taken to satisfy the filters was worth it.  No sales whatsoever on 5 of them and one totally irrelevant sale on the 6th, so poof!  GONE!  It wasn't easy to delete them but I was surprised by how liberated I felt after they disappeared from my portfolio.  Truth be told I have a number of other lenses that SHOULD be deleted, but I am the eternal optimist and want to give them a fighting chance to prove my fears wrong.

The remaining 19 took various additions to get them to pass the filters.  Some were simple, others not so easy, but I managed to get them all 'fixed' within the time frame, working on the best producers first.  Since then I have had lenses show up with "low quality" warnings.  These are not flagged, but did need little tweaks to fix.  The built in Amazon modules seemed to give me the biggest problem, so switching up to using my own links in text modules took care of those.  Ever mindful that Squidoo is a 'free' site to use I added an Amazon search module so that Squidoo can benefit from Amazon sales too.  Truthfully I do not think it is necessary, but the search module does serve a purpose, so it is a win-win situation for both of us.  Besides, customers have to scroll through all of my affiliate links before getting to the search module.

What really bamboozles me the most is the number of lenses that did NOT get either a "low quality" warning OR flagged.  Some of the lenses I fully expected to need attention didn't get flagged.  Naturally I have still done some improvements to them 'just in case' they would have gotten flagged in the future.

Squidoo haven't finished with their 'clean up' yet.  Logically they should never be, because there are always people using Squidoo as a means to spam their crap all over the Internet.  Despite being advised of TOS (Terms of Service) violations by other lensmasters (really the eyes and ears of Squidoo) some offenders still sit upon their pedestals and laugh at those of us with morals.  It can be extremely frustrating, but long ago I learned that there is one set of rules for some, and another set of rules for the rest of us.  So be it!  I have better things to do with my time than to worry about it too long.  Besides, I am a big believer in "live and let live" but I am also a supporter of the theory that "what goes around comes around".  I am quite confident that at some point those using dishonest means to 'earn' a living will find the rug pulled out from underneath them.  I just hope that despite their lack of honesty and morals they at least have the good sense to get some of their nefarious earnings in the Bank while they are still sitting in 'hog heaven'.  As with anything in life, tomorrow it could all be gone.

Back to the question:  Is Squidoo in the early throes of death?  I fear they are.  I think they buried their heads in the ground for far too long and are now trying to clean up the mess.  Personally I would have put filters in place l-o-o-n-n-n-g-g before now.  Isn't prevention better than cure?  Zujava and Wizzley saw what was happening on Squidoo and vowed they would do everything they could to prevent it happening on their sites.  As a result, they are fairly clean and spammers know it is not worth their time trying to get their crap on those sites.

What happens to the lensmasters who have put years of blood, sweat, tears, love and passion into their lenses, IF Squidoo goes down the gurgler?  Many of the lensmasters trying to make a living online already have alternative plans, such as their own websites, blogs, writing on other sites, etc.  Unfortunately there are a huge number of people who have no plans and will lose their work.  At the very least everyone should have a back up copy of their articles.  If Squidoo goes down those articles can be used on other sites (after a sufficient wait period to ensure they are de-indexed first to prevent accusations of plagiarism).

Most of my income is still linked to Squidoo and Amazon.  I am making moves to create other streams of income, with one website in creation, 2 other domains that require building on, and two existing blogs.  Is that enough?  Absolutely not!  Just this morning I spent time trying to find a catchy phrase domain name that I could move my "shopping cart" lenses over to if the proverbial shit hits the fan.

Dropping traffic numbers at Squidoo don't bode well for the future.  They were hit once before and recovered, but the Internet is different now.  It is quite possible that their vision for Squidoo is not sustainable in Google's eyes.  Unfortunately Squidoo has set themselves up for potential failure by allowing the number of "shopping cart" lenses to become too high a percentage of the total number of lenses and Google wasn't impressed.

Squidoo seems to have mixed impressions as to what it is going to take to get back on track.  HQ pushes multiple quests on us every week, trying to encourage us to write more.  So many of us are reluctant / unwilling to invest any more time and effort into the site.

My feeling is that Squidoo is trying to put a BandAid on a huge, gaping gash and hoping that the wound will not become infected, or even worse the 'patient' will die.

I look forward to hearing your thoughts on the future of Squidoo.

Squidoo Spam Filter Caught These Phrases And Didn't Like Them

In a conversation with another lensmaster, she advised me that she had been the unfortunate recipient of spam notices for two of her recently published lenses.  After going through the usual methods to discover the cause and not finding the problems, she sat back and thought about what else could possibly be wrong with her well-written lenses. 

After much deliberation she came to the conclusion that in one lens on plus-sized costumes it was the use of XXX Large, with the XXX being the offending part.  As a good number of her costumes were in this size, taking each module out and trying to republish had not worked.  She then went through and changed each of the XXX Large references to 3X-Large and the lens published without any further problem.

On the other lens it appeared to be the combination of the words 'naughty' and 'adult' (another costume lens) that tripped the spam filter.  Again, these terms had been used several times throughout the lens to describe some of the costumes, and so removing a module at a time had not worked there either. 

So there you have it.  Two of the words/phrases that Squidoo spam filters do not like.  If you know of any other seemingly innocent words/phrases please be kind enough to share with the rest of us.

Quick Update To The Credibility Issue Of Yesterday

Just received a response and wouldn't you know it?  Seems it was an automated response and so didn't bother to answer my questions in any way, shape or form.  Am unsubscribing from one email list, and because I like the information on the other I am going to remain subscribed. 

Don't lose your credibility!

I know I haven't posted in such a long time, and quite frankly, that is shame on me.  I know my credibility is at stake and so I need to address this problem that I have posting regularly and just deal with it.  It isn't that I don't have stuff to tell you all because I do!  So let me start with offering an apology for being less than ideal when it comes to blog posting.  Sorry.

MY allowing credibility to slip was brought home to me very quickly and very sharply this morning when I opened up my emails and was disgusted with what I saw.  I subscribe to quite a few newsletters and I particularly like those on the subject of natural health and nutrition.  This morning I opened an email and read of how the writer's mother had been on a particular Diabetes medication and that as a result she had lost function in both her kidneys.  Now this is a great story but it completely lost credibility when I realized that I had read the same exact story in another email only a few days prior.

To say that I was angry is a mild understatement.  I was pissed big time!  But....once I had gotten over being pissed it made me realize how others may be making the same mistake.  I would guess that these two sites had purchased the same PLR or were using the same story and not considering the consequences of doing so.  How much credibility do you think either of them have in my eyes today?  Little to none, is the answer.  First, this sucks because they both did a disservice to their mothers and that is a no-no in my book.  Mothers are human but they are sacred humans and should be treasured for the time you have left with them on this earth.  Yes, I took it personally.  My mother has been gone for several years now and there isn't a day that goes by without me missing her.

The second thing that sucks about this whole fiasco is that they made it sound as if both their mother's had been afflicted with the same problem.  Now, this could be because the sites are owned by the same person, or they are siblings, but either way it smacked of a cheap tactic to me and I didn't hesitate to let them know that I was disappointed in their doing this.
Excerpt from email sent to one site this morning:
"I am disappointed.  it appears you and this other site are both using the same story to get people to become Charter members.  My guess is that neither of you have a mother with kidney trouble.  Because of this I am strongly considering unsubscribing from both newsletters.  This is misleading tactics and one or both of you ought to be ashamed of yourselves.  NO credibility whatsoever with this tactic!"
Of course they don't respond to emails during the weekend but it should be fascinating reading when (if) they do.

The warning here for us as online marketers/writers is to be absolutely credible with what we write.  Make sure you do not post the exact same content in more than one place.  Squidoo doesn't tolerate copied material being published on their site, and nor do a lot of other sites.  How much effort does it take to write the same article from a slightly different angle so they are not alike?

Please, preserve your credibility at all costs, and most of all?  Don't sell your mother down the river for anything!

Working From Home Isn't Without Stress

Sorry, guys.  It's true.  Sure, you aren't answerable to anyone but yourself.  Or so you think.  Actually, the facts are that you are answerable to the boss (yourself) every bit as much as you would be the boss in a traditional job.  Not just that, but you may find that people you know think because you work at home you are available anytime they should want to call upon you for favors.  You are also answerable to the pets in your life, your children, your spouse.  Finding balance in your work and home may actually be more difficult because they are located in the same place.  The good news is that should you need a break, you can give yourself one.

I have been helping someone to increase their Squidoo earnings.  I have come to appreciate this very special lady, and today she is not feeling all that great, which saddens me.  Even though she is feeling down, and unwell, she took the time to send me this beautiful email and it made me stop and think about something other than work.  I hope it will give you pause for thought too.

 I would rather have one rose and a kind word from a friend while I'm here, than a whole truck load when I'm gone. These Are For You!!!






Happiness keeps you Sweet,

Trials keep you Strong,

Sorrows keep you Human,

Failures keep you Humble,

Success keeps you Glowing,

But... Only Friends...

Keep You Going!!!