JL Forums

POST SUBMISSION MANUAL -- Initial Draft...
Begun on: September 12, 2008, last update: November 23, 2008

WHY THIS MANUAL?

There need to be rules. If 1WL didn't have the rules it has, it wouldn't be as effective as it is, and therefore the time, money and energy of participants would be wasted.  The rules aren't there because the Administrators love a lot of rules.  They're there because that's what makes it work.

Is is generally agreed that we all prefer more rules with real results over few rules with no results.

[Synopsis: This Post Submission manual has been written to act as a guide for new users. The rules below were gleaned from suggestions and observations made on the 1 Way Links Forum from September 12, 2008 to date. There was a fair amount of discussion on this forum about postings getting declined/rejected. Some had inquired about a list of rules.
 
We were in beta. That means we needed to develop the "rules" as we went along.

Here is the list of rules that we came up with:]


RULES REGARDING FORMAT:


Rule 1. Posts must be At Least 250 words long.

Rule 2. You must have at least 3 Paragraph breaks. More would be better, to make the text more readable.

Rule 3. Set up your links (Maximum 3 per post) as hyperlinks using your key words as they appear in the text of your post.

Rule 4. Always check your links from the Preview Page, to make sure they are working.

[The editor sometimes has a way of changing "<" and ">" symbols into text equivalents that mean the links won't work until you go into "html" mode and fix them.]

Rule 5. Do not add a sentance to the bottom with a link in it. (looks spammy)

Rule 6. No odd MS Word characters, since these tend to clog up the software and cause problems. Put your text into NotePad or similar program, set to reduce everything to plain, simple ASCII text.

Rule 7. No html (other than your three hyperlinks). No bold, italicized or underlined text. No special fonts. Make your paragraph breaks by hitting 'return' twice.

Rule 8. Any post about anything remotely medical in nature must have a disclaimer. Something like this:

Disclaimer: This posting is based on information freely available in the popular press and medical journals that deal with [medical subject]. Nothing herein is intended to be or should be construed to be any sort of medical advice. For medical advice the reader should consult with his or her physician or other medical specialist.

Rule 9. Spread your post submissions out, don't enter them all at once. There is a 15 post maximum to the number of posts that will be accepted in one day.


 
RULES REGARDING CONTENT:


Rule 1.  Stay well clear of anything referring to religion or to subjects on the fringes of religious practices or beliefs. This means avoid words/subjects such as Yoga, meditation, any mention of religious icons or celebration of religious holidays or holidays that are celebrated as such in known parts of the world (such as Halloween, for instance).

Rule 2. Nothing regarding the occult, witchcraft, contacting the dead, voodoo, black magic, magic or mysticism in any form, including hypnosis, past lives regression, reincarnation, etc.

Rule 3.  Nothing political, nothing taking or advocating a political position. Just avoid the subject and/or its fringes.

Rule 4. Stay "Family friendly".  Nothing that even hints at being 'adult'.

Rule 5. Nothing gambling related.

Rule 6. Nothing "black hat" or advocating questionable SEO practices, spam or anything that might be illegal or banned by the search engines.

Rule 7. No links to sites that include topics from 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 or 6, above.



POSSIBLE GUIDELINES YOU MIGHT WANT TO CONSIDER:


Many have come on the forums asking how to start, what to do. The following section has been added as a possible guideline for 1 Way Links users just starting out. It's not official, just opinion, but newcomers might find it useful...

It has been suggested that you spin your postings, spread out their sizes and release dates so that they seem natural and, don't overwhelm the SE's credibility.  Such as, having 250 x 3 = 750 links appear on a new site in ne month's time might look suspicious enough to get you put into the "Google sandbox".

Everyone has his or her own methods and techniques for use. This is up to the user to customize for his or her particular needs.

That said, for whatever it's worth, here's what I (Jorchav) do:

I use posting sizes from 25-45, checking site ranking on the key word being used to gauge which KW's to push next. (There are time lags for approval, then dissemination, then for the SE spiders to find the links. Think 30-50 days overall before you get 70-85% of what you are going to ultimately get in the way of credit.)

Also take into account that many blogsites are not very well optimized for getting their postings indexed. You won't likely get full credit, especially on all search engines. At this point in time (23 November, 2008) I seem to be getting credit for somewhere between 25 - 40% of the theoretical max links. This means that on a 40 postings post, instead of 120 links I seem to be getting 30 to 50.  It's hard to be exact because some links are still being "discovered" by the SE's 6-8 weeks after post submission.

I want to spread my links around so that I get on page 1 for 15 kw phrases rather than get an unassailable first place on 3 kw's. So what I am doing is "feeling out" how many links it will take to get onto page 1 or page 1 "above the fold". I'm trying to use enough links but not overdo it and waste them. So I do a small posting, check results and then do another, or re-run the first one to get the count up.

I spin my postings with alternate sentences and paragraphs such that the total number of variations well exceeds the total number of postings to be made. This to avoid duplicates and, hopefully, get more links and more "link love" from non-duplicate postings than I might from duplicate postings.

For example, I might write 3 alternate 1st paragraphs, 2 alternate paragraphs for each of 3 links and three alternate closing paragraphs. This scheme gives a total number of variations of  3 x 2 x 2 x 2 x 3 = 72 possible variations. For a 35-40 posting then, text duplicates would be possible but not likely.

To go with that I would probably dream up 6-8 alternate titles, each containing some key words, and use an equal number of signature/author variations, plus 0 (unsigned).  (These are important because they are the easiest and therefore probably the first thing the search engines look at when looking for duplicates.)

This is just my own personal way-of-thinking/usage plan, included here for guideline purposes only. Maybe it will give new people who are just starting out a track to run on until they can devise their own. Please note that others disagree with some or all of my premises above, and use entirely different approaches. You be the judge and make your own decisions/plan. 


There, that's it. That's where we are to date.   

[Comments? Additions? Corrections? Suggestions?  Anyone?  - Jorchav]

Hi,
In regard to "spinning" our posts. I've read somewhere that the "spinning" process leaves tracks or traces behind. And that Google detects those tracks and then treats the post the same as duplicated content anyhow.
Do we know for certain whether that's true or not?
Thanks,
Webot2

I don't know for certain, but seriously doubt the "tracks or traces" part. That's too easy to see. ASCII text is ASCII text, with nothing between the lines/characters. You can detect the effects of spinning by using more computer power, of course. Look at copyscape, which gets down into comparing individual phrases within sentences, picks up any time four words are strung together the same way.

Could be done, but the argument against is the computer power and time required. You would have to compare one article against millions more, and the problem goes up exponentially as the total number of articles out there grows linearly. So while spinning could theoretically be detected as you suggest, practically speaking, for a well-spun posting, it would cost too much, take too much time and generally wouldn't be worth that amount of expenditure and effort on the part of the SE's.

So what is well-spun? Depends on what you are comfortable with. I use "more possible alternative versions than there are versions posted" I mostly spin whole sentences and paragraphs. Others have different approaches.

It's kind of like choosing a bullet-proof vest. Proof against what? A 9mm pistol round? A 50 caliber sniper rifle round? A bazooka? You have to make a trade-off between what it will stop and how heavy it is to carry...    For spinning, the trade-off is between how hard it is to detect and how much time does it take to set up...

First, hello everyone, I'm a new guy. (Well, I mean, I'm not new at being a guy - but I'm new here).

I've gone through the manual and parts of the forum. I even have two posts running and a blog that is filling up with your stuff. I have two questions that I did not see answered in my travels.

1. Is a signature link allowed as a "4th Link"? My blog site has a number of posts coming in with the indicated 3 links in the body PLUS a signature or even just a word at the bottom that is also a link - a 4th link. Is this allowed? If it is, is it good practice? If it is not, why is such a simple thing not being caught at the review stage (seeing as I spotted them in about a second)?

2. At least one of my approved and active posts appeared on a blog with only 1 out of 3 links. I understood that the group was to allow posts that are approved to be posted as approved. If I'm going to have links cut out then what's the point of going through the trouble of writing text around alternate keywords and then deep linking? Are blog sites allowed to remove links from approved sites?  (What's worse, with this one post, is the blog added it's own signature with a link to another site at the bottom of my post. Is that OK?  ***edit: I just saw my own post on my own blog, and it had a signature link that I did not place and is different from the others. I take it this is something added by the "system" then? Cool idea for rotating signatures, yes?)

Thanks for the time. I'm just trying to get a good start and play by ALL the rules. I look forward to hearing from someone.

Mike

No, it's not the spinning, but good suggestion. Your post prompted me to take a closer look at the sentence structure in the post I thought was missing links. Turns out it's not at all. The blog format just makes them look exactly like regular words - but I could see one of them because I had recently visited that page and it must have been displaying as "clicked" - with an underline and blue text.

Sorry for creating any confusion. The 3 links are in fact there, the system is really cool, and the "4th link" mystery is solved.

Thanks!
Mike

This is not true.

Here's how to know about spinning:

Duplicates for 1-word string: 64.5%
                   2-word string: 42.8%
                   3-word string: 29.1%
                   4-word string: 16.8%
                   5-word string: 10.30%
                   6-word string: 7.6%
                   7-word string: 7.6%
                   8-word string: 0


I am sure computers can be programmed to have more advanced parameters to track spinning.

Also, English language uses 3,000 common words most of the times. In basic expressions the usage is over 90%, for intermediate texts around 80% and for even advanced level texts the usage is 70%. This is courtesy Oxford University Advanced Learners English Dictionary. The list of 3,000 words is available for ready download there.

When you spin mechanically, the usage of this group of words will reduce unnaturally.

Also there are phrases, usages, collocation, phrasal verbs and other things to take care.

If you can spin taking care of all of this, you can actually rewrite completely with less effort naturally. I wouldn't call that spinning.

Language study uses computers for very advanced analysis and it will be simplistic to assume spinning can fool analysis.

wwday3,

No offence meant.

I only reacted to your statement above:

Quote

There is no way spinning could leave "tracks" unless the spinner malfunctioned and left the spinning syntax visible in the post.

Unquote

I thought the duplicate percentages between two versions of spun text was obvious.

These are not theoretical by the way.

When everyone around the world start filling up webpages with spun text without adding to the volume of ideas, will there be no attempt at avoiding waste of time on repetitive ideas even if the spun texts read all right?

Anyway we should avoid unnecessary debates.

Regards
Shiv

I signed up for this program to promote a Psychic page, that includes topics on Mediumship, and Psychic capabilites and my life and those would be some of the keywords I would use in my blog and as keywords that woould be the content I promote, ie Psychic Medium etc.  My question is, is this considered ok or woul dit be better to switch to the 3waylink system, as that would be on my home page.  Please advise, as this was the reason for me purchasing the system.  Please HELP...thanks 

It's hard to be sure. I would guess there's about a 60% chance that material on "psychic" would bounce, but that's just a semi-educated guess. I don't know exactly where the boundaries are.

My suggestion would be to whip out a post, hit the subject you want to promote and see if it gets rejected. Then you'll know.

Best of luck to you... Happy New Year!

I haven't understood 1 thing specifically...

We cannot post articles about Halloween? with links to halloween costumes shop sites?

thanks

Jom