Comments on: How to sign up for WebmasterWorld http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/how-to-sign-up-for-webmasterworld/ neat fun stuff Sat, 20 Mar 2010 04:13:22 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: Chris http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/how-to-sign-up-for-webmasterworld/#comment-341562 Chris Sat, 06 Jun 2009 18:52:46 +0000 http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/?p=240#comment-341562 I compare the Webmasterworld site to the expert exchange sooner the better Google kicks them out they are noting only Scumbags I compare the Webmasterworld site to the expert exchange sooner the better Google kicks them out they are noting only Scumbags

]]> By: John http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/how-to-sign-up-for-webmasterworld/#comment-218172 John Tue, 13 Jan 2009 01:41:25 +0000 http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/?p=240#comment-218172 I knew there had to be someway to sign up without paying. Thanks for posting this article, or I never would have signed up for that forum. I knew there had to be someway to sign up without paying. Thanks for posting this article, or I never would have signed up for that forum.

]]> By: Seo experts http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/how-to-sign-up-for-webmasterworld/#comment-115792 Seo experts Wed, 07 Nov 2007 12:43:25 +0000 http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/?p=240#comment-115792 Webmasterworld is a full of useful info, but I'm not sure if this info shroud be paid. Webmasterworld is a full of useful info, but I’m not sure if this info shroud be paid.

]]> By: P. De Krem http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/how-to-sign-up-for-webmasterworld/#comment-115317 P. De Krem Mon, 29 Oct 2007 10:06:32 +0000 http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/?p=240#comment-115317 I had a account on webmaterworld but it is verry difficult to sign out thy still take money of my papal account. I had cancel this transaction but still thy had taken the money i send 100 of emails but no refund sofare. be cairful up a paid account. Best regards I had a account on webmaterworld but it is verry difficult to sign out thy still take money of my papal account. I had cancel this transaction but still thy had taken the money i send 100 of emails but no refund sofare. be cairful up a paid account.

Best regards

]]> By: Julio Marketing de Sites http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/how-to-sign-up-for-webmasterworld/#comment-112756 Julio Marketing de Sites Fri, 14 Sep 2007 21:38:21 +0000 http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/?p=240#comment-112756 Webmasterworld, built for the 90’s and… well, thats about it. I once read that good scripts own awesome designs - I tend to prefer smaller communities. Webmasterworld, built for the 90’s and… well, thats about it.

I once read that good scripts own awesome designs – I tend to prefer smaller communities.

]]> By: Bill Kelm - Brokerblogger http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/how-to-sign-up-for-webmasterworld/#comment-98762 Bill Kelm - Brokerblogger Mon, 05 Mar 2007 21:42:12 +0000 http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/?p=240#comment-98762 Matt, I got here throgh a 3/5/07 comment link from a Threadwatch thread called "Matt and the Cloak of Confusion". I did not have time to read all the comments on this post of yours, but I wanted to add something about WMW that I believe relevant. I'm not sure if your way of "signing up for WMW" gets someone into "the Private Supporters Forum" or not, but if it does there probably were a lot of upset paid subscribers. My post was on "Is an "Automatic Renewal" a Deceptive Marketing Tool ?". In it I said "I canceled my (paid) subscription to WebmasterWorld not because it isn't a fine publication, but because I no longer needed it as much as I used to, and their "Subscribe to WebmasterWorld" page had an automatic renewal subscription plan that did not send me any pre-notification renewal notice e-mails (that I ever received), besides never stating upfront how many times they would send those (reminder) e-mails." So, if I can now have free access to "the Private Supporters Forum" through your suggestion, then I may "sign up". Thanks. Matt, I got here throgh a 3/5/07 comment link from a Threadwatch thread called “Matt and the Cloak of Confusion”.

I did not have time to read all the comments on this post of yours, but I wanted to add something about WMW that I believe relevant. I’m not sure if your way of “signing up for WMW” gets someone into “the Private Supporters Forum” or not, but if it does there probably were a lot of upset paid subscribers.

My post was on “Is an “Automatic Renewal” a Deceptive Marketing Tool ?”. In it I said “I canceled my (paid) subscription to WebmasterWorld not because it isn’t a fine publication, but because I no longer needed it as much as I used to, and their “Subscribe to WebmasterWorld” page had an automatic renewal subscription plan that did not send me any pre-notification renewal notice e-mails (that I ever received), besides never stating upfront how many times they would send those (reminder) e-mails.” So, if I can now have free access to “the Private Supporters Forum” through your suggestion, then I may “sign up”. Thanks.

]]> By: Mark http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/how-to-sign-up-for-webmasterworld/#comment-93917 Mark Fri, 19 Jan 2007 17:00:14 +0000 http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/?p=240#comment-93917 I'm inclined to agree with the majority opinion here. The fact that you can get a free login to WMW is beside the point - what matters is that WMW is openly getting away with practices that would cause any other site to be banned from the index. As someone who recently got threatened with having my Adsense account pulled because one of the compliance team spotted that I'd got ads on a page with a mildly offensive joke, I certainly feel the victim of double standards here. If WMW want to block spiders from the site, that's up to them. As I understand it, that was the original intent - to try to make the site successful without the need for Google or other search engines driving traffic to the site. In some cases, that's a perfectly sensible choice and if you've got a forum that you want to keep spiders out of then that's fine. But WMW is trying - and succeeding, it seems - to have it both ways: have the benefit of Google's traffic without the downsides of having an openly viewable site. The fact that Google seems to approve of this, even to the extent of putting WMW at the top of a lot of search results, only reflects badly on Google. I’m inclined to agree with the majority opinion here. The fact that you can get a free login to WMW is beside the point – what matters is that WMW is openly getting away with practices that would cause any other site to be banned from the index. As someone who recently got threatened with having my Adsense account pulled because one of the compliance team spotted that I’d got ads on a page with a mildly offensive joke, I certainly feel the victim of double standards here.

If WMW want to block spiders from the site, that’s up to them. As I understand it, that was the original intent – to try to make the site successful without the need for Google or other search engines driving traffic to the site. In some cases, that’s a perfectly sensible choice and if you’ve got a forum that you want to keep spiders out of then that’s fine. But WMW is trying – and succeeding, it seems – to have it both ways: have the benefit of Google’s traffic without the downsides of having an openly viewable site. The fact that Google seems to approve of this, even to the extent of putting WMW at the top of a lot of search results, only reflects badly on Google.

]]> By: Jeff http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/how-to-sign-up-for-webmasterworld/#comment-93268 Jeff Sat, 06 Jan 2007 23:41:38 +0000 http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/?p=240#comment-93268 Yes, WMW is blatantly cloaking and yet Google just ignores the abuse. It is annoying to see useful-looking information in the Google results, then click only to get a "pay me money" screen instead. And yes, there is a way to register for free. But the page intentionally hides that, and even so that constitutes cloaking. Many of us have flied Google abuse reports about WMW results to no effect. It makes me wonder why I should continue filing abuse reports to Google at all. Here are a couple more articles about WMW cloaking: http://blog.outer-court.com/archive/2006-11-28-n23.html http://tips.webdesign10.com/googles-double-standard-on-search-engine-cloaking Yes, WMW is blatantly cloaking and yet Google just ignores the abuse. It is annoying to see useful-looking information in the Google results, then click only to get a “pay me money” screen instead. And yes, there is a way to register for free. But the page intentionally hides that, and even so that constitutes cloaking.

Many of us have flied Google abuse reports about WMW results to no effect. It makes me wonder why I should continue filing abuse reports to Google at all. Here are a couple more articles about WMW cloaking:

http://blog.outer-court.com/archive/2006-11-28-n23.html
http://tips.webdesign10.com/googles-double-standard-on-search-engine-cloaking

]]> By: JLH http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/how-to-sign-up-for-webmasterworld/#comment-93235 JLH Fri, 05 Jan 2007 19:02:17 +0000 http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/?p=240#comment-93235 Brandon: Detect it? They endorse it. Brandon: Detect it? They endorse it.

]]> By: Brandon http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/how-to-sign-up-for-webmasterworld/#comment-91887 Brandon Sun, 17 Dec 2006 02:26:24 +0000 http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/?p=240#comment-91887 Why doesn't Google's advanced system detect the cloaking on this site? Why doesn’t Google’s advanced system detect the cloaking on this site?

]]>