|
Posted by Deborah Bonner on October 30, 2009, 3:11 pm
show/hide quoted text
> > Jinx Minx wrote:
> >>> On Thu, 29 Oct 2009 21:41:33 -0500, Dianne Lewandowski
> >>>> lucretiabor...@fl.it wrote:
> >>>>> At the least, it is uncommonly bad manners.
> >>>> And you are Miss Manners? =A0Not even close.
> >>>> Dianne
> >>> Give up Dianne and accept that you didn't know squat about forums
> >>> linking themselves to usenet groups. =A0Are you telling us you approv=
e ?
show/hide quoted text
> >>> Do you comprehend that the poor woman who wanted advice would never
> >>> see her post here and would only see any suggestions that the forum
> >>> idiot condescended to repost over at the forum for her ?
> >>> Shows that the forum idiot knows very little, it was after all a
> >>> knitting question and would do better on a knitting group, whose name
> >>> I won't suggest in case he/she does not already link to them.
> >> Yes, they've also got a feed of RCTYarn into their "Knitting and other
> >> yarn carfts" group. =A0Yes, they really spelled it "carfts".
> >> My feelings on usenet being syndicated via RSS feeds elsewhere is mixe=
d.
show/hide quoted text
> >> Sure, on a very basic level these "outside" sites provide a way in whi=
ch
show/hide quoted text
> >> to access RCTN (which might come in handy the more that ISP's drop
> >> usenet). People reading through these sites may or may not even know
> >> these aren't "local forum" posts but feeds from usenet.
> >> On the other hand, the reasoning behind capturing usenet on these outs=
ide
show/hide quoted text
> >> websites puts it into grey territory. =A0Really, is it fair for some
> >> website to broadcast all of our usenet posts (perhaps not even noting
> >> it's an RSS feed but portraying it as their own forum) in order to
> >> generate traffic to *their* website in order to make money off the
> >> subsequent advertising that comes from having a high traffic website?
> >> Web searches for particular needlework topics aren't going to lead web
> >> searchers to "usenet", they're going to lead the searcher to these
> >> alternative websites. =A0The higher the traffic they can capture, the =
more
show/hide quoted text
> >> money they make. =A0In my opinion, that's really half a step above ste=
aling
show/hide quoted text
> >> if they're doing this specifically to profit off of "our" usenet
> >> community unbeknownst to us. =A0 Specifically, 52,272 RCTN articles th=
ey
show/hide quoted text
> >> can profiteer from.
> >> Here's a link that explains it without being too technical:
> >>http://www.rss-specifications.com/making-money-with-rss.htm
> >> Have to side with Sheena on this one,
> >> Jinx
> > Hi, Jinx. =A0I read the article, but I'm still unsure how anyone can ma=
ke
show/hide quoted text
> > money off of it. =A0Yes, it keeps your ranking up in the search engine.=
But
show/hide quoted text
> > how does that equate to money, unless it's driving retail customers to
> > your site? =A0I guess I'm just not getting it.
> > Dianne
> Advertisers pay the site owners in order to advertise on their high traff=
ic
show/hide quoted text
> site. =A0The higher the traffic the site can generate, the more desireabl=
e a
show/hide quoted text
> location to advertise on, which then generates higher advertising income =
for
show/hide quoted text
> the owner, and on and on. =A0It's insidious, and that's my problem with i=
t.
show/hide quoted text
> Both sides are profitting off of us, and we get nothing.
> Jinx
Wow. Things certainly have changed since I used to post here some
years ago. There seems to be a lot more spam and I am not sure what
happened here with Bettye's post. I am sure that she didn't mean to
make trouble. Still just wanted to say that I am happy to see that you
have all stuck it out with all the changes and that I will always know
where to come to find the needlework experts who will actually try to
help. Though I may not always have anything to say I will always be
reading.
| 
Yahoo! 
Google 
Windows Live 
del.icio.us 
digg 
Netscape 
XML Sitemap
> >>> On Thu, 29 Oct 2009 21:41:33 -0500, Dianne Lewandowski
> >>>> lucretiabor...@fl.it wrote:
> >>>>> At the least, it is uncommonly bad manners.
> >>>> And you are Miss Manners? =A0Not even close.
> >>>> Dianne
> >>> Give up Dianne and accept that you didn't know squat about forums
> >>> linking themselves to usenet groups. =A0Are you telling us you approv=