The Flat Earth Society
Other Discussion Boards => Technology & Information => Topic started by: rottingroom on July 19, 2014, 11:53:11 PM
-
It seems that way given his recent announcement about making a big social media presence and t-shirts.
He's probably trying to recover from the realisation that we're about to hit 3k likes after just a few months of operation, or the fact that our net social media acquisition outweighs his more than tenfold. Of course, if we were to reconcile, together we'd have well over 4k likes already, and growing even faster. Heck, we could be shooting for 5 digits soon.
Might that be a foreword for an argument on why reunion could be a good idea (assuming the community's demands are met)? I think so. If we can ensure that the reunited site and Society are ran in a way that satisfies (shooting for satisfying here, and not just satisfactory) its members, then the argument would simply be that of strength in numbers. Our differences aside, we all have some common goals, or else we would never find ourselves active on either forum. The big question for now is whether our differences can be resolved for the greater good, or if we feel that the potential benefits wouldn't outweigh any downsides.
Are you sure that you aren't a victim of this?
Facebook Fraud: http://youtu.be/oVfHeWTKjag
-
Are you sure that you aren't a victim of this?
Facebook Fraud: http://youtu.be/oVfHeWTKjag (http://youtu.be/oVfHeWTKjag)
To the same extent that they can be sure of their 1200 likes. A quick comparison of engagement levels shows promising (if less objectively comparable) results too.
-
How do you know. Where are all these likes coming from?
-
How do you know.
I don't understand the question. How do I know that I am subject to a Facebook-wide phenomenon as much as other pages of Facebook? Well, that might be because we're talking about Facebook profiles.
-
How do you know.
I don't understand the question. How do I know that I am subject to a Facebook-wide phenomenon as much as other pages of Facebook? Well, that might be because we're talking about Facebook profiles.
Huh? First of all why did you move this? You touted Facebook likes and then I pointed out that they might not be genuine. Then you said they are and you don't even know how to tell if they are genuine or not even though the video shows you how.
-
And actually yes they can be more sure about their likes than you can because your likes are recent and this is a recent phenomenon happening most often with new pages.
-
Huh? First of all why did you move this? You touted Facebook likes and then I pointed out that they might not be genuine.
Because you were turning a side comment into the subject of an ongoing serious discussion. Do not derail S&C threads. If you think others (in this case, arguably myself) have derailed an S&C thread, do not derail S&C threads anyway.
Then you said they are and you don't even know how to tell if they are genuine or not even though the video shows you how.
How do you know what I do or do not know? As I said, the engagement of each page is largely proportional to the amount of likes, ergo it speaks to reason that we are equally affected (or not affected) by the issue. You are harping about a non-factor, as usual.
-
Huh? First of all why did you move this? You touted Facebook likes and then I pointed out that they might not be genuine.
Because you were turning a side comment into the subject of an ongoing serious discussion. Do not derail S&C threads. If you think others (in this case, arguably myself) have derailed an S&C thread, do not derail S&C threads anyway.
Then you said they are and you don't even know how to tell if they are genuine or not even though the video shows you how.
How do you know what I do or do not know? As I said, the engagement of each page is largely proportional to the amount of likes, ergo it speaks to reason that we are equally affected (or not affected) by the issue. You are harping about a non-factor, as usual.
Because I asked you how you know and you didn't have a response that sounded like you know. You also edited your initial response.
I'm harping on as usual? Please. I'm bringing to light the fact that Daniel has no reason at all to concede to what anyone is proposing and you somehow think you do because of some Facebook likes?
-
Because I asked you how you know and you didn't have a response that sounded like you know.
Congratulations.
You also edited your initial response.
Welcome to 2009. I edit most of my posts shortly after posting them. If that's your best comeback, consider not having a comeback.
I'm harping on as usual?
Yes.
I'm bringing to light the fact that Daniel has no reason at all to concede to what anyone is proposing and you somehow think you do because of some Facebook likes?
No.
-
Wow. So how do you know that your likes are genuine again?
-
Wow. So how do you know that your likes are genuine again?
Let's try this once again. Since the ratio of likes to approximate engagement for each page is similar, it stands to reason that the percentage of "genuine" likes on each page is similar. In other words, we are as affected or unaffected as one another.
-
(http://i.imgur.com/FlFd4uM.gif)
-
Wow. So how do you know that your likes are genuine again?
Let's try this once again. Since the ratio of likes to approximate engagement for each page is similar, it stands to reason that the percentage of "genuine" likes on each page is similar.
Ah so you didn't learn how you can tell from the video.
-
Great thread.
-
I did look at the page and it seems that most of your insights come from Lagos, Nigeria. Boy that sounds genuine.
-
Ah so you didn't learn how you can tell from the video.
I did. As the cool dude from the pop science channel said, what matters is engagement. That's why I'm comparing engagement. I'm not going to click on 3000 profiles (or 300 profiles, to get a meaningful sample) and check if they like random crap. I don't need to do that, because I don't care about the percentage as a number. I care about proportions.
Also, you may enjoy this: http://www.jonloomer.com/2014/02/11/facebook-fraud-response/
I did look at the page and it seems that most of your insights come from Lagos, Nigeria. Boy that sounds genuine.
Considering that we get comments from those people, yes, it does.
Also, importantly, when you say "most", you mean "less than 10%".
-
Ah so you didn't learn how you can tell from the video.
I did. As the cool dude from the pop science channel said, what matters is engagement. That's why I'm comparing engagement. I'm not going to click on 3000 profiles (or 300 profiles, to get a meaningful sample) and check if they like random crap. I don't need to do that, because I don't care about the percentage as a number. I care about proportions.
Also, you may enjoy this: http://www.jonloomer.com/2014/02/11/facebook-fraud-response/
I did look at the page and it seems that most of your insights come from Lagos, Nigeria. Boy that sounds genuine.
Considering that we get comments from those people, yes, it does.
There is what, 6 comments total? Come on.
-
There is what, 6 comments total? Come on.
(http://i.imgur.com/19HywTB.png)
-
There is what, 6 comments total?
No.
-
Also, importantly, when you say "most", you mean "less than 10%".
-
Look, this is just like that time when you said it's impossible to spoof an e-mail. Go do your 20 minutes of research and save us all some time.
-
There is what, 6 comments total?
No.
I'm sorry I didn't count very thoroughly. Its hard to view the full site from a mobile device. Turns out it is 21. That definitely changes everything
-
Look, this is just like that time when you said it's impossible to spoof an e-mail. Go do your 20 minutes of research and save us all some time.
But he watched a video. He is now an expert.
-
Turns out it is 21.
Nope.
You're also missing the part where by "most" you meant "10%".
-
Look, this is just like that time when you said it's impossible to spoof an e-mail. Go do your 20 minutes of research and save us all some time.
What is relevant about that? Are you saying Tapatalk spoofed emails?
-
Turns out it is 21.
Nope.
You're also missing the part where by "most" you meant "10%".
Oh so now you think Lagos is the only place that has like farms? I can only imagine what the rest of those analytics look like. Maybe you could end this by just taking a screenshot. Show all those likes that cone from countries that actually use the internet.
-
Also, it could be that you are right and they are genuine, which is fine by me. I just wanted to see if you had entertained the possibility. It just doesn't seem likely that your site is genuinely more popular than the old one because when you do an incognito search on google the old site is first and because I don't see random noobies here but they are aplenty over there.
-
Oh so now you think Lagos is the only place that has like farms?
No, I'm addressing your claim that most of our insights (sic) come from Lagos, Nigeria. Here, have a quote:
I did look at the page and it seems that most of your insights come from Lagos, Nigeria. Boy that sounds genuine.
They don't. We have 243 likes from Lagos. That is less than 10%.
I can only imagine what the rest of those analytics look like. Maybe you could end this by just taking a screenshot. Show all those likes that cone from countries that actually use the internet.
k:
(http://i.omgomg.eu/fbcountries)
Yes, some of our likes from Nigeria are probably not useful. Even if you slash 715 likes from us, we're at 2.2k, just about to double the other site's likes. If you decide you don't like Mexico too, we're still ahead, albeit not by much. That is assuming that all our likes from the top 2 countries are completely fabricated (n.b. they're not, we get a fair amount of shares from Mexico and we've had an ok amount of comments from Nigeria), and that all of the old site's likes are 100% genuine (which they likely are not).
when you do an incognito search on google the old site is first
Learn some SEO. Their domain reputation is pretty high, given that they've been around for 9 years. We've been consistently (and very slowly) climbing up in Google results.
-
Looks like click farm stats to me. By the way I know that their domain reputation is higher than yours. That was precisely my point.
-
Looks like click farm stats to me.
To reiterate:
Yes, some of our likes from Nigeria are probably not useful. Even if you slash 715 likes from us, we're at 2.2k, just about to double the other site's likes. If you decide you don't like Mexico too, we're still ahead, albeit not by much. That is assuming that all our likes from the top 2 countries are completely fabricated (n.b. they're not, we get a fair amount of shares from Mexico and we've had an ok amount of comments from Nigeria), and that all of the old site's likes are 100% genuine (which they likely are not).
By the way I know that their domain reputation is higher than yours. That was precisely my point.
So your point was "precisely" that they're an older site, and therefore your Facebook argument has nothing to do with this? Congratulations, you knew why you were wrong and you still driveled about it.
-
What the fuck are you talking about? I brought up SEO because the fact that it is easier to find the old site makes it seem less likely that your site is more popular than the old one.
-
What the fuck are you talking about?
The very claims you make, sadly. It's not my fault you're contradicting yourself so much.
I brought up SEO because the fact that it is easier to find the old site makes it seem less likely that your site is more popular than the old one.
It is, however, easier to find our Facebook page, and most of our acquisition comes from social interaction started by people who already liked the site.
-
All 21 social interactions.
-
Know what's funny?
I did a search on Facebook for the flat earth society.
I got only 3 pages that look like one of ours.
Two are groups. One of which is closed.
The last is an automatically generated page.
So... What the hell are you guys talking about?
-
All 21 social interactions.
You bore me.
(http://i.omgomg.eu/fbposts)
I don't know where you get your numbers from, but you have yet to get one right.
-
Maybe posts are hidden or something.
-
In any case, glad the site is doing well. Seriously.
-
pizaa, why don't you move shitposting threads to designated shitposting areas?
-
Maybe posts are hidden or something.
You won't be able to see most social interactions. In our case, they will usually happen on people's walls, and those are often private.
pizaa, why don't you move shitposting threads to designated shitposting areas?
This might be a shitty argument, but it's a solidly technical one. It belongs here imho.
-
Its not a shitty argument. Its a worthwhile consideration that you are actually a victim of. Not all the likes are the result of it but its apparent that a large portion are.
-
Its not a shitty argument. Its a worthwhile consideration that you are actually a victim of. Not all the likes are the result of it but its apparent that a large portion are.
None of the numbers match your argument, which honestly points to it being a shitty argument. Furthermore, the Flat Earth Society is more likely to be more popular with less educated countries but those which have a great deal of Internet access (Nigeria).
-
Its not a shitty argument. Its a worthwhile consideration that you are actually a victim of. Not all the likes are the result of it but its apparent that a large portion are.
None of the numbers match your argument, which honestly points to it being a shitty argument. Furthermore, the Flat Earth Society is more likely to be more popular with less educated countries but those which have a great deal of Internet access (Nigeria).
Nigeria is a click farm country so no, you're wrong. No big deal though. This site is obviously important.
-
I urge everone not to use Facebook.
-
I urge everone not to use Facebook.
Like
-
Nigeria is a click farm country so no, you're wrong. No big deal though. This site is obviously important.
No, you're wrong.
See? That's a pretty terrible argument. Try again.
-
You guys are crazy. My argument is that a lot of his likes are not genuine. Turns out this is true. He posted the evidence himself.
-
You guys are crazy. My argument is that a lot of his likes are not genuine. Turns out this is true. He posted the evidence himself.
Do you read what you write before you hit the post button? I'm thinking you just roll your face on the keyboard and hope something sensible presents itself.
-
I'm just typing out quick responses cause I don't have time for your bullshit
-
I'm just typing out quick responses cause I don't have time for your bullshit
Why even post at all?
-
I'm just typing out quick responses cause I don't have time for your bullshit
Why even post at all?
Cause it takes 5 seconds. See.
-
Not posting takes zero seconds. If you're only doing something because you can do it quickly, why not just not do that thing even quicker?
-
I urge everone not to use Facebook.
-
I urge everone not to use Facebook.
Holy shit, nobody cares.
-
It is very important.
-
But then how will a I connect and socialize with my thousands of friends in Nigeria?
-
Its not a shitty argument. Its a worthwhile consideration that you are actually a victim of. Not all the likes are the result of it but its apparent that a large portion are.
Why?
I've read though this thread and the only evidence I can see is the country of origin and quantity. Yet the motivation isn't there so why would people from Nigeria search for the flat earth society for the sole reason of artificially inflating our likes?
-
Its not a shitty argument. Its a worthwhile consideration that you are actually a victim of. Not all the likes are the result of it but its apparent that a large portion are.
Why?
I've read though this thread and the only evidence I can see is the country of origin and quantity. Yet the motivation isn't there so why would people from Nigeria search for the flat earth society for the sole reason of artificially inflating our likes?
Because click farms like things at random even when they aren't paid for in an attempt to seem more authentic. This way their likes are not all for the same things.
-
Its not a shitty argument. Its a worthwhile consideration that you are actually a victim of. Not all the likes are the result of it but its apparent that a large portion are.
Why?
I've read though this thread and the only evidence I can see is the country of origin and quantity. Yet the motivation isn't there so why would people from Nigeria search for the flat earth society for the sole reason of artificially inflating our likes?
Because click farms like things at random even when they aren't paid for in an attempt to seem more authentic. This way their likes are not all for the same things.
Then to know that the likes aren't genuine you'd have to go through the profiles of everyone and determine if they are randomly liking shit or not. Anything less is just a guess based on stereotyping of a nation.
-
Its not a shitty argument. Its a worthwhile consideration that you are actually a victim of. Not all the likes are the result of it but its apparent that a large portion are.
Why?
I've read though this thread and the only evidence I can see is the country of origin and quantity. Yet the motivation isn't there so why would people from Nigeria search for the flat earth society for the sole reason of artificially inflating our likes?
Because click farms like things at random even when they aren't paid for in an attempt to seem more authentic. This way their likes are not all for the same things.
Then to know that the likes aren't genuine you'd have to go through the profiles of everyone and determine if they are randomly liking shit or not. Anything less is just a guess based on stereotyping of a nation.
Maybe. The point here is that likes are meaningless.
-
Its not a shitty argument. Its a worthwhile consideration that you are actually a victim of. Not all the likes are the result of it but its apparent that a large portion are.
Why?
I've read though this thread and the only evidence I can see is the country of origin and quantity. Yet the motivation isn't there so why would people from Nigeria search for the flat earth society for the sole reason of artificially inflating our likes?
Because click farms like things at random even when they aren't paid for in an attempt to seem more authentic. This way their likes are not all for the same things.
Then to know that the likes aren't genuine you'd have to go through the profiles of everyone and determine if they are randomly liking shit or not. Anything less is just a guess based on stereotyping of a nation.
Maybe. The point here is that likes are meaningless.
If likes were meaningless, why would like farms exist?
-
Its not a shitty argument. Its a worthwhile consideration that you are actually a victim of. Not all the likes are the result of it but its apparent that a large portion are.
Why?
I've read though this thread and the only evidence I can see is the country of origin and quantity. Yet the motivation isn't there so why would people from Nigeria search for the flat earth society for the sole reason of artificially inflating our likes?
Because click farms like things at random even when they aren't paid for in an attempt to seem more authentic. This way their likes are not all for the same things.
Then to know that the likes aren't genuine you'd have to go through the profiles of everyone and determine if they are randomly liking shit or not. Anything less is just a guess based on stereotyping of a nation.
Maybe. The point here is that likes are meaningless.
If likes were meaningless, why would like farms exist?
Because they were meaningful until like farms existed and most of all because there is monetary incentive for them to exist since people are under the impression that they matter even when they don't. There is no SEO for Facebook likes. The thing about Facebook is that likes do not typically turn into opportunities for a sale either, which makes them even more meaningless. Facebook is used for keeping in touch with friends and family and when people are doing that, ads are considered obtrusive. This is why Facebook has always had a difficult time monetizing their social network because it turns out that a social network is a terrible place to attempt a sale. When determining the best time to offer an ad one should consider intent. That's why search engines are a good place to offer them... because when people are INTENDING to make a purchase they are likely to search for items or items related to their search. Nobody thinks, "hey, I want to buy a computer, maybe Facebook is the place to look for one."
-
By the way pizaa, there are ways to climb past the old site in search results, at least on Google (and really, that's all that matters).
http://www.socialmediaexaminer.com/use-google-increase-search-rankings/
-
I urge everone not to use Facebook.
-
Its not a shitty argument. Its a worthwhile consideration that you are actually a victim of. Not all the likes are the result of it but its apparent that a large portion are.
Why?
I've read though this thread and the only evidence I can see is the country of origin and quantity. Yet the motivation isn't there so why would people from Nigeria search for the flat earth society for the sole reason of artificially inflating our likes?
Because click farms like things at random even when they aren't paid for in an attempt to seem more authentic. This way their likes are not all for the same things.
Then to know that the likes aren't genuine you'd have to go through the profiles of everyone and determine if they are randomly liking shit or not. Anything less is just a guess based on stereotyping of a nation.
Maybe. The point here is that likes are meaningless.
If likes were meaningless, why would like farms exist?
Because they were meaningful until like farms existed and most of all because there is monetary incentive for them to exist since people are under the impression that they matter even when they don't. There is no SEO for Facebook likes. The thing about Facebook is that likes do not typically turn into opportunities for a sale either, which makes them even more meaningless. Facebook is used for keeping in touch with friends and family and when people are doing that, ads are considered obtrusive. This is why Facebook has always had a difficult time monetizing their social network because it turns out that a social network is a terrible place to attempt a sale. When determining the best time to offer an ad one should consider intent. That's why search engines are a good place to offer them... because when people are INTENDING to make a purchase they are likely to search for items or items related to their search. Nobody thinks, "hey, I want to buy a computer, maybe Facebook is the place to look for one."
I think you just disproved your own point. Remember, an item is worth what's someone will pay for it.
-
Its not a shitty argument. Its a worthwhile consideration that you are actually a victim of. Not all the likes are the result of it but its apparent that a large portion are.
Why?
I've read though this thread and the only evidence I can see is the country of origin and quantity. Yet the motivation isn't there so why would people from Nigeria search for the flat earth society for the sole reason of artificially inflating our likes?
Because click farms like things at random even when they aren't paid for in an attempt to seem more authentic. This way their likes are not all for the same things.
Then to know that the likes aren't genuine you'd have to go through the profiles of everyone and determine if they are randomly liking shit or not. Anything less is just a guess based on stereotyping of a nation.
Maybe. The point here is that likes are meaningless.
If likes were meaningless, why would like farms exist?
Because they were meaningful until like farms existed and most of all because there is monetary incentive for them to exist since people are under the impression that they matter even when they don't. There is no SEO for Facebook likes. The thing about Facebook is that likes do not typically turn into opportunities for a sale either, which makes them even more meaningless. Facebook is used for keeping in touch with friends and family and when people are doing that, ads are considered obtrusive. This is why Facebook has always had a difficult time monetizing their social network because it turns out that a social network is a terrible place to attempt a sale. When determining the best time to offer an ad one should consider intent. That's why search engines are a good place to offer them... because when people are INTENDING to make a purchase they are likely to search for items or items related to their search. Nobody thinks, "hey, I want to buy a computer, maybe Facebook is the place to look for one."
I think you just disproved your own point. Remember, an item is worth what's someone will pay for it.
No. I'm not talking about what the item is worth to the person paying for it. I'm talking about the ends (which are worthless) and then means (which are paid for).
-
Its not a shitty argument. Its a worthwhile consideration that you are actually a victim of. Not all the likes are the result of it but its apparent that a large portion are.
Why?
I've read though this thread and the only evidence I can see is the country of origin and quantity. Yet the motivation isn't there so why would people from Nigeria search for the flat earth society for the sole reason of artificially inflating our likes?
Because click farms like things at random even when they aren't paid for in an attempt to seem more authentic. This way their likes are not all for the same things.
Then to know that the likes aren't genuine you'd have to go through the profiles of everyone and determine if they are randomly liking shit or not. Anything less is just a guess based on stereotyping of a nation.
Maybe. The point here is that likes are meaningless.
If likes were meaningless, why would like farms exist?
Because they were meaningful until like farms existed and most of all because there is monetary incentive for them to exist since people are under the impression that they matter even when they don't. There is no SEO for Facebook likes. The thing about Facebook is that likes do not typically turn into opportunities for a sale either, which makes them even more meaningless. Facebook is used for keeping in touch with friends and family and when people are doing that, ads are considered obtrusive. This is why Facebook has always had a difficult time monetizing their social network because it turns out that a social network is a terrible place to attempt a sale. When determining the best time to offer an ad one should consider intent. That's why search engines are a good place to offer them... because when people are INTENDING to make a purchase they are likely to search for items or items related to their search. Nobody thinks, "hey, I want to buy a computer, maybe Facebook is the place to look for one."
I think you just disproved your own point. Remember, an item is worth what's someone will pay for it.
No. I'm not talking about what the item is worth to the person paying for it. I'm talking about the ends (which are worthless) and then means (which are paid for).
If likes were worthless then no one would buy them.
Clearly they are worth something. And if the people running the page think they mean they're a good group then there must be people who are not running the page who agree.
-
Its not a shitty argument. Its a worthwhile consideration that you are actually a victim of. Not all the likes are the result of it but its apparent that a large portion are.
Why?
I've read though this thread and the only evidence I can see is the country of origin and quantity. Yet the motivation isn't there so why would people from Nigeria search for the flat earth society for the sole reason of artificially inflating our likes?
Because click farms like things at random even when they aren't paid for in an attempt to seem more authentic. This way their likes are not all for the same things.
Then to know that the likes aren't genuine you'd have to go through the profiles of everyone and determine if they are randomly liking shit or not. Anything less is just a guess based on stereotyping of a nation.
Maybe. The point here is that likes are meaningless.
If likes were meaningless, why would like farms exist?
Because they were meaningful until like farms existed and most of all because there is monetary incentive for them to exist since people are under the impression that they matter even when they don't. There is no SEO for Facebook likes. The thing about Facebook is that likes do not typically turn into opportunities for a sale either, which makes them even more meaningless. Facebook is used for keeping in touch with friends and family and when people are doing that, ads are considered obtrusive. This is why Facebook has always had a difficult time monetizing their social network because it turns out that a social network is a terrible place to attempt a sale. When determining the best time to offer an ad one should consider intent. That's why search engines are a good place to offer them... because when people are INTENDING to make a purchase they are likely to search for items or items related to their search. Nobody thinks, "hey, I want to buy a computer, maybe Facebook is the place to look for one."
I think you just disproved your own point. Remember, an item is worth what's someone will pay for it.
No. I'm not talking about what the item is worth to the person paying for it. I'm talking about the ends (which are worthless) and then means (which are paid for).
If likes were worthless then no one would buy them.
Clearly they are worth something. And if the people running the page think they mean they're a good group then there must be people who are not running the page who agree.
It's absurd how difficult simple concepts are on the FES. The like are mistakenly worth something to the buyer but they are actually worthless and the only benfit-or from click farms is the click farm that makes money off the likes. Because the like are not genuine, they are not real impressions and they don't turn into anything beneficial for the page owner. We are not talking about economics here. In that regard you would be correct, but this is about SEO.
-
It's absurd how difficult simple concepts are on the FES. The like are mistakenly worth something to the buyer but they are actually worthless and the only benfit-or from click farms is the click farm that makes money off the likes. Because the like are not genuine, they are not real impressions and they don't turn into anything beneficial for the page owner. We are not talking about economics here. In that regard you would be correct, but this is about SEO.
I understand what you're saying perfectly. I was merely refuting your claim that the likes were worthless.
In fact, as PP alluded to, a like farm could randomly like your page multiple times. This in turn makes you seemingly more popular to search engines than pages with fewer likes. This, in turn, means that legitimate people will more likely visit your page and hopefully like it. As the more people like it, the higher it goes in the search results and the more likely other people will see it and like it.
Once the likes have reached a point where it's statistically unlikely to be mostly click farm likes, the page will thrive on it's own and any click farm likes become statistically irrelevant.
-
Dave is right. If likes are worthless then no one would buy them and click farms would stop making money.
-
It's absurd how difficult simple concepts are on the FES. The like are mistakenly worth something to the buyer but they are actually worthless and the only benfit-or from click farms is the click farm that makes money off the likes. Because the like are not genuine, they are not real impressions and they don't turn into anything beneficial for the page owner. We are not talking about economics here. In that regard you would be correct, but this is about SEO.
I understand what you're saying perfectly. I was merely refuting your claim that the likes were worthless.
In fact, as PP alluded to, a like farm could randomly like your page multiple times. This in turn makes you seemingly more popular to search engines than pages with fewer likes. This, in turn, means that legitimate people will more likely visit your page and hopefully like it. As the more people like it, the higher it goes in the search results and the more likely other people will see it and like it.
Once the likes have reached a point where it's statistically unlikely to be mostly click farm likes, the page will thrive on it's own and any click farm likes become statistically irrelevant.
This would be true if Facebook likes had any impact on the only search engine that matters.
-
Dave is right. If likes are worthless then no one would buy them and click farms would stop making money.
Again, we are talking about SEO, not its value to click farms.
-
http://searchenginewatch.com/article/2319951/Facebook-Likes-Shares-Dont-Impact-Google-Search-Rankings-Study
But +1's do. This is where this forum could get the upper hand on SEO over the old site. Since both forums are ignoring G+.
-
Dave is right. If likes are worthless then no one would buy them and click farms would stop making money.
Again, we are talking about SEO, not its value to click farms.
So no one searches for groups on Facebook?
-
But then how will a I connect and socialize with my thousands of friends in Nigeria?
email. just mak sure you retrieve your emails with wget
-
Dave is right. If likes are worthless then no one would buy them and click farms would stop making money.
Again, we are talking about SEO, not its value to click farms.
So no one searches for groups on Facebook?
The facebook search engine. Brilliant.
-
Look, the typical scenario works like this:
I just heard that there are people who believe the world is flat. I'm going to go Google that.
This is how people learn about things. Sure, people do use the facebook search box for a group but that doesn't happen unless they have already established an interest in that topic. They most likely already know about the society in that case. SEO can lead you to the forums based on your interest of flat earth in general.
-
Look, the typical scenario works like this:
I just heard that there are people who believe the world is flat. I'm going to go Google that.
This is how people learn about things. Sure, people do use the facebook search box for a group but that doesn't happen unless they have already established an interest in that topic. They most likely already know about the society in that case. SEO can lead you to the forums based on your interest of flat earth in general.
Incorrect. This is how people learn about things they already know about. One can't google "flat earth society" if they've never heard of it.
-
Look, the typical scenario works like this:
I just heard that there are people who believe the world is flat. I'm going to go Google that.
This is how people learn about things. Sure, people do use the facebook search box for a group but that doesn't happen unless they have already established an interest in that topic. They most likely already know about the society in that case. SEO can lead you to the forums based on your interest of flat earth in general.
Incorrect. This is how people learn about things they already know about. One can't google "flat earth society" if they've never heard of it.
what makes you think they need to google "flat earth society"?
I didn't say that.
If you turn on incognito mode and search for "is the earth flat" then the old society comes up as the 5th result while the new one appears half way down the second page. This is a pretty big deal for this site. I've offered a way to fix that and you're here trying to argue that facebook likes are valuable to someone other than click farms.
-
both forums are ignoring G+.
Incorrect.
-
Look, the typical scenario works like this:
I just heard that there are people who believe the world is flat. I'm going to go Google that.
This is how people learn about things. Sure, people do use the facebook search box for a group but that doesn't happen unless they have already established an interest in that topic. They most likely already know about the society in that case. SEO can lead you to the forums based on your interest of flat earth in general.
Incorrect. This is how people learn about things they already know about. One can't google "flat earth society" if they've never heard of it.
what makes you think they need to google "flat earth society"?
I didn't say that.
If you turn on incognito mode and search for "is the earth flat" then the old society comes up as the 5th result while the new one appears half way down the second page. This is a pretty big deal for this site. I've offered a way to fix that and you're here trying to argue that facebook likes are valuable to someone other than click farms.
No. You argued that the 4k likes on our Facebook page didn't mean anything about our activity or Facebook exposure. Fixing the search engine stuff is a completely different matter irrelevant to all of Facebook. Simply allowing google spider bots on our forum, putting in key words on each page's header, and altering our domain name to have flatearth in it would fix our ranking.
-
both forums are ignoring G+.
Incorrect.
Having a profile won't do anything. You must engage.
-
Look, the typical scenario works like this:
I just heard that there are people who believe the world is flat. I'm going to go Google that.
This is how people learn about things. Sure, people do use the facebook search box for a group but that doesn't happen unless they have already established an interest in that topic. They most likely already know about the society in that case. SEO can lead you to the forums based on your interest of flat earth in general.
Incorrect. This is how people learn about things they already know about. One can't google "flat earth society" if they've never heard of it.
what makes you think they need to google "flat earth society"?
I didn't say that.
If you turn on incognito mode and search for "is the earth flat" then the old society comes up as the 5th result while the new one appears half way down the second page. This is a pretty big deal for this site. I've offered a way to fix that and you're here trying to argue that facebook likes are valuable to someone other than click farms.
No. You argued that the 4k likes on our Facebook page didn't mean anything about our activity or Facebook exposure. Fixing the search engine stuff is a completely different matter irrelevant to all of Facebook. Simply allowing google spider bots on our forum, putting in key words on each page's header, and altering our domain name to have flatearth in it would fix our ranking.
I still think Facebook likes are pointless. Search got wrapped into it because you tried to make the case that Facebook likes had an effect on SEO. They might on bing, but not on Google and that is what people use.
-
You must engage.
And we have been. Again, you're probably not seeing the full picture, but you're eager to assume.
-
Terrible thread.
-
You must engage.
And we have been. Again, you're probably not seeing the full picture, but you're eager to assume.
Eager to assume what? My assumption is that you are listed lower than the old site. I'm trying to help but it's coming off as criticism so everyone is being defensive. Currently, I'm trying to figure out how to get your G+ page on to the right column of a Google search result. There are ton of SEO experts available on G+ that know a lot about this stuff.
-
Terrible thread.
I disagree. This is the best one-sided debate I've read since sokarul was last around.
-
I find it to be a strange thread. I feel like I've lost the debate even though it's been demonstrated that I am right about the OP.
-
PP made this point from the start but it seems you may have glossed over it, if old site and new site both suffer from click farms, let's go ridiculous and say 50%, is 50% of 1k suddenly more than 50% of 4k? When you factor in click farms, factor them in for both and this site's FB page is still more popular than the old site's FB page.
-
I feel like I've lost the debate even though it's been demonstrated that I am right about the OP.
Yeah, there's a difference between making a number of valid statements and presenting a coherent and comprehensive point.
-
PP made this point from the start but it seems you may have glossed over it, if old site and new site both suffer from click farms, let's go ridiculous and say 50%, is 50% of 1k suddenly more than 50% of 4k? When you factor in click farms, factor them in for both and this site's FB page is still more popular than the old site's FB page.
I did address this when I said that newer pages are more susceptible to farming.