What about the rabbit’s hole?

Posted October 4, 2007 by gargilius
Categories: internet

Tags: , ,

I realize I haven’t talked much of the rabbit’s hole. Things have been happening too fast. I have made some encounters down there; got burnt a couple of times too. It is time I write a little about what I found.

I am going to do here something preposterous: defining web 2.0. Many have spectacularly failed in this attempt. Nobody really agrees about what it is anyway. Here are some examples of partially contradicting - or at best obscure - definitions:

Wikipedia:

«Web 2.0, refers to a perceived second generation of web-based communities and hosted services — such as social-networking sites, wikis and folksonomies — which aim to facilitate collaboration and sharing between users.»

Tim O’Reilly’s “compact” definition:

«Web 2.0 is the business revolution in the computer industry caused by the move to the internet as platform, and an attempt to understand the rules for success on that new platform. Chief among those rules is this: Build applications that harness network effects to get better the more people use them. (This is what I’ve elsewhere called “harnessing collective intelligence.”)»

And here is his long definition.

Paul Graham:

«Web-based applications.»

So, here is my very own…

Definition of Web 2.0:

Web 2.0 is a set of social structures added on top of the Good Old Internet (GOI).

Mathematical detour: In the very unlikely event there is a mathematician in the couple of persons reading my blog: think algebra. You take an abstract set (= good old internet GOI), like the set of integer numbers. Add an algebra to it (= social structure), like addition: suddenly you have a meaningful and organized set.

Each of the social structures that form web 2.0 (for example del.icio.us, stumble, facebook, twitter, digg) are mostly devoid of their own original content, but are full of meta-content, i.e. content about the content of the GOI. Some may think it is hogwash.

I actually saw pieces of news about a blog, commenting another blog, that was summarizing a newspaper article that was talking of…

But each of these sites provides alternative paths to the content of the GOI, balancing Google’s power. And as such, justify their existences.

What is spam?

Posted August 19, 2007 by gargilius
Categories: internet marketing, thirty day challenge

The blogs created by thirty day challengers on Tumblr are being destroyed by the handful.

I’m nuking Tumblr “affiliate marketing” spammers by the thousands. This is surprisingly fulfilling.

Well, is it spam? According to some unclear source, spam is:

«To indiscriminately send unsolicited, unwanted, irrelevant, or inappropriate messages, especially commercial advertising in mass quantities.»

According to this definition, yes, the thirty day challengers’ massive assault on Tumblr is spam. Not spam of internet users, since the blogs were supposed to provide quality content - but spam of Marco Arment, whose web site received thousands (tens of thousand?) of account requests for a commercial purpose, whereas Tumblr has been mainly designed for leisure.

What’s Tumblr? Our pride and joy. And something we’re really excited about.

Imagine: 15 thousand challengers creating accounts for each of their umbrella phrases. Courtesy would have required to ask Tumblr’s permission first.

Unfortunately, Marco Arment’s indiscriminate “nuking” of countless blogs, most of them legitimate according to Tumblr’s own content policy, many of them genuine, is likely to do more harm than good to Tumblr. And his pruning is disheartening many would-be bloggers whose only “sin” is to be associated with the Thirty Day Challenge.

Google confusion

Posted August 15, 2007 by gargilius
Categories: internet marketing

Something weird is going on at Google Trend: they have removed the last month of data from the graphs since yesterday.

Is it a consequence of the Thirty Day Challenge effect???

Yesterday:

Superconductors trend on Google, August 15

Today:

Superconductors trend on Google, August 16

On the other hand, the trend per language does not seem to have been updated.
Technorati Tags: , ,

Measurement effect: do we need to change the standard?

Posted August 14, 2007 by gargilius
Categories: internet marketing

Since last week, more than ten thousands 30-day challengers are using the GTrend ratio tool to uncover starving niches. This large number of searches has skewed the trend curve for “male yeast infection” that is used as a calibration standard as representing 500 unique visitors per days.

It came to my attention today that the GTrend number for a number of off-beat niches has severely dropped. For example, a phrase I am using for my own calibration that had a GTrend number of 500 last week has only 325 today. (I will not write this phrase here, in order to be able to use it again in the future to calibrate my own measurements.) It shows that Google has updated its data for “male yeast infection”.

I propose to change weekly the calibration standard to avoid such fluctuation effects. A phrase that has a GTrend number of about 500 should be kept secret to calibrate all the standards. The secret calibration phrase should not be a likely market niche to avoid it fluctuates as more challengers research the markets. Any phrase that has a GTrend of 500 (as measured with the “secret” calibration phrase) can be used as new standard. For example, a suitable replacement phrase for “male yeast infection” is “superconductors” (without quotes) that has also a GTrend number of about 500 (according to my calibrating phrase).

New tandard suggestion for GTrend

Comparison between the trends of “male yeast infection” and “superconductors”: very close before the surge due to Thirty Day Challengers.

The difference shows that Google has updated its data.
The comparison by language shows a difference, showing that Google is using the more recent data for “male yeast infection”.

LONG copy vs SHORT copy video

Posted August 7, 2007 by gargilius
Categories: internet marketing

I have always been wary of long copies, you know these webpages that go on and on about their miracle solution to your problem. You must have seen some, at least in junk mails.

I found this article about long copy versus short copy by Lorrie Morgan-Ferrero:
URL: Are we still arguing about LONG copy vs SHORT copy?

This lady sells copywriting service. Checking her website, Red Hot Copy, sure enough she used a long copy style, and oh boy, it’s powerful stuff! Check it out - or on second thought, don’t if you are not ready to part with $750 hard-earned cash for an appraisal of your copywriting needs. Yes, it’s that compelling. I guess I had only encountered bad long copies, or long copies for different prospects.

Ed Dale’s Red Hot video of Thirty Day Challenge website that convinced thousands of people to sign up for the challenge - including me, - is his “long copy” take of a video. Of course, he could have made a 10-second video saying “Sign up for the thirty day challenge, it’s free”. But it is not likely it would have performed so well.

Technorati Tags: , ,

And now what?

Posted August 6, 2007 by gargilius
Categories: internet marketing

Where is the rabbit’s hole, do you ask?

You cannot see it.

You see, if you are reading this post, chances are you are yourself an inhabitant of the rabbit’s hole.

Believe it or not, I have been running an internet business for years without having ever used or read

- a blog
- an rss feed
- a video on YouTube
- iTune
- a social networking site
- anything related to web 2.0

I have stumbled upon the Thirty Day Challenge (vintage 2007
) that puts all these things together to show how ones can get leverage to increase the number of visitors, the goal of the challenge being to start an internet business and make at least $10 in profit in one month.

I am not going to summarize the challenge here - there are several excellent blogs that do just that, - but I will write here about some insights I get on the journey down the rabbit’s hole.

Now, I am getting serious…

Posted August 6, 2007 by gargilius
Categories: marketing

… done! My first posting.