We’ve been busy again!! Our lastest acquistion is Biziki.com, bought from Blog Media via a recent sitepoint auction. It’s a blog we’ve had our eye on for a while- not least because it shares the superb, and exclusive eratizine WP theme design by Chris Pearson. We contacted Chris earlier this year to try and get him to do a design overhaul of our whole network and it was tentatively set for this November. Unfortunately, Chris wrote to us to say that tubetorial was just taking up too much of his time and he couldn’t do it. I recall rather a witty comment about fortunes not being made by “icasso” unless there was a “p” in front of it, to which I recommended a more Warholesque approach! So…failing that, we decided to stay with the eratizine theme, which Biziki, Gadzooki and this blog- JOAB- uses. Our thanks to Matt Craven of Blog Media for handling the transaction/transfer in a polite, efficient and professional manner. However, we would like to mention something in regards to this purchase in the spirit of clearing some seeming bad blood (that we were previously unaware of). The previous main blogger of Biziki, Brian Yalung, aka “bryboy”, has posted several things around the net, including at the Blog Herald and on personal blogs- indicating that there was a “misunderstanding” with ourselves (partner site: Word Content) and that somehow the parting of the ways was not good, insinuating in some way that we were at fault. To quote Brian-:

I think I will not be considered by these people since I have some issues with them in the past. I have worked for them in the past and our parting was not so good. While they gave me a good break in the past, I wouldnt be surprised if I will run into trouble with them. This is precisely why I looked to freelance to avoid them.

Ahem...to say nothing of another classic piece of Brian waffle…I don’t want to get into mud-slinging here (actually, maybe I do?), but Brian knows the truth of the matter very well- that he acted unethically and dishonestly. We gave Brian every opportunity in many areas- writing for Word Content, linkbuilding for Link Lander and submitting articles for ArticleSubmission.net. What happened was that Brian was found to be using our software and concepts to promote his own personal agendas. Having confronted Brian with this- it was just a matter of a “ticking off” and he was not fired. He chose to diappear on us instead (probably in shame!) and turned up as the blogger on Biziki. He was fully paid for all his work for us and was at no time mistreated in any way and we take issue with his subsequent insinuations against us. Online reputations are fragile and this is why we write this now. All that is said here is fact and can be backed up by a variety of independent sources. Having said all this, from our end, water under the bridge.

Anyway, we are very pleased to have acquired this blog. A PR6 with some good earnings from Adsense and TLA made financial sense in its own right. But it also fits into our portfolio- with our plan to turn it into a Political Blog. While this may seem a drastic change, politics is a business and a rather dirty one at that. We have already initiated a Business Blog of our own: BizCrunch.net and with the Senate and Congress elections now over in the US, it’s all going to be fun and games with the fight for the White House!

On a personal level, even though I am from the UK, I love US politics. As partisan and media-driven as it may be, it is far more engaging and combative than the rather sedate, irrelevant discussions we have in the UK, or obscene, open corruption in Asia.

What happens in the US matters to all of us and impacts our lives in a very real, tangible way. That makes it exciting.

[tags] biziki,gadzooki,bloggy network,sitepoint,matt craven, chris pearson,brian yalung, political blog [/tags]

I despise the fact that I sound like a moralizing, self-righteous jerk. I know that I do, really. But still- I just can’t help myself. This is really a follow-up on my post about Celebrity Blogs, which The Sheriff well and truly trashed. And no doubt I’ll get trashed for this post as well. But it’s what I truly believe and that’s why I write it- so let the chips fall where they may!

For quite some time now, I have had a web content providing business, Word Content, which includes a blog service. We’re in the process of merging this blog service into the Bloggy Network through BloggyService.com and BloggyMarketing.com. A lot of the content-related blog service work that we have taken on has been in the area of online gambling. Rather like some loyal Republican voters may have to do when voting down party lines in the upcoming Congress and Senate elections, I have just “held my nose” and done the work as required.

Such is the way we are sold down the river, slowly but surely.

Let us just get one thing straight off the bat. Unless you are a genuine, professional gambler and do it for a living, you will not beat the house- online or offline. This is a fact and to suggest anything otherwise is truly ludicrous. There is a reason that so many online and offline casinos are expanding so rapidly and reaping in massive profits; & it’s not difficult to understand why- the mathematics/odds always favor the house. Voila. Eureka.

I hope that you won’t mind if I indulge you in some personal history at this point. I used to gamble- fulltime, professionally. I had made enough money by the time I was 25- that I was able to buy a 4 storey house in a very smart area of London. It wasn’t unusual for me to gamble $100,000 over a single session of backgammon and my usual stake at blackjack was $5,000 a hand. You can read some things I wrote for a client’s site, including: “Gambling For A Living” & “Bio of a Tipster“.

I’m not trying to blow my own trumpet here- more give you a background for what I’m about to say. My life became an absolute disaster- in every way. I lost everything and more. And I’m not just talking about money. This is the inevitable outcome of being an addicted gambler. Of course, this does not apply to everyone. Many of you will be able to happily gamble away, know when to stop, enjoy the process and treat it just like any other entertainment pursuit.

Nevertheless, my experiences allow me enough insight to believe that gambling blogs should (in general) be damned on three counts of absolute immorality-:

The first part of the immorality with gambling blogs is that, in the majority, they won’t even recognize that gambling is a serious addiction and a disease. And that if you are suffering from this disease, you must get help. I can’t remember on which of my client’s blogs it was, but I recall a comparison between gambling addiction and an addiction to one’s iPod or McDonalds. This is almost criminally negligent. The fact is that there is no difference between a disease like alcoholism (which I think most people are “aware” enough now to recognize is a disease and NOT a matter of “willpower”)- and the same 12 step program is applied through Gambler’s Anonymous. The same brain chemicals are used and abused in an addiction to gambling as are used in cocaine, crack and other addictive drugs. These are facts and gambling blog owners should be well aware of them before pontificating their ignorance. When people challenge this theory, there is no better riposte than to ask why insurance companies would dole out millions of dollars a year to pay for the treatment of gambling addicts? Most private treatment programs are a minimum of 28 days and cost on average $25,000+. Do you think if it was purely a “whim” or a matter of “choice” that insurance companies would cough up so readily?

The second reason why these gambling blogs are immoral are that (again- I’m making a huge generalization here- there are some excellent gambling blogs out there)- is that the blog owners know zilch about gambling. Their only concern is to make a profit. Gambling blogs really can be very profitable indeed. This is owing to the hugely generous bonuses offered by affiliates for players signing up, let alone even playing. Literally, you can make a profit over the month just through one player who signs up and plays. Say through 888.com – the largest online casino out there- you might get $50 for a player signing up and then 30% of their amount gambled and lost. You can soon be making $$ in the hundreds- and the player is often “yours for life”. But this does beg the question- who is the sucker who signed up?? Any gambler with even the most basic knowledge of online gambling will know how to “refer himself” and take advantage of the affiliate savings. So this is really a case of throwing out a large net in the hope to catch a little fish- probably some 16 year old using Mommy’s credit card.

And the third reason why we should damn these gambling blogs is the way that so many of them promote “sure win strategies”. Crumbs- one of my clients even has this “betting bot” software that “guarantees” you will win $20,000 within the first month. And he got 10,000 subscribers to his newsletter the week we launched it. I can’t see how much more immoral one can get in this area. My client knows, like I do- that no such software is realistic or available. The best any of us can do is improve and narrow down our odds to be 50% at best- through smart, disciplined play and money management. And all of these “gambling gurus” with their “sure win” ebooks, blogs and websites- why the hell are they bothering? If they can double their money every day through their “unbeatable methods”- what do they need to sell us their books for? Off to Cancun for you, sir! Ah! But they’re blacklisted by the all the major casinos…of course they are!! -:)

These are the sort of myths that the casinos love to see bandied about. Perfect strategies, counting cards…whatver. In fact, I’m pretty sure that they perpetuate many of them! I’m not in favor of banning online gaming- no more than I would be for banning good old Marlboro Reds. But I do believe that gambling blogs should be more open and honest about the three aforementioned points that I have made: a) gambling can be addictive ; b) to openly declare the affiliates you will profit through & c) there are no “sure win” strategies. And you should even have a link to a website that can help with someone suffering from gambling addiction and an attached “warning”.

I’d like to end with two caveats to this post. Firstly, I believe that any “human vs. human” game, like poker or backgammon- does not come under all that I have said in this post, as my comments are primarily based on a “human vs. the house” scenario. Yes- you can become addicted to gambling through playing poker- but you can also win realistically if you are the better player over the long-term. And secondly, if you are clever and disciplined- I believe that you can win against online casinos, in the short-term, purely by taking advantage of their “bonuses”- & “cutting and running”. I wrote about this some time ago on Casino.ht under the pseudonym Max Castell.

But as a final note, let us return to condemnation. 99% of gambling blogs are just dead dull. They regurgitate the same old ….over and over and over. Anyone worth their salt would be learning the ropes the old-fashioned way- by playing and deluding themselves into poverty. And then…hopefully….they will have learnt that it ain’t so easy after all….

[tags]gambling,poker,backgammon,gambling blogs,gambling addiction,immorality,gambling,online casinos,gambling blogs, blog content services, blog marketing,gambling software, affiliates, 888.com, betting bots[/tags]

It’s one of those buzzwords soon to be condemned to hell: pro blogging. So who are these pro bloggers and what can we learn from them? Hopefully we can make a million dollars by doing very little work. In fact, quite the opposite is true- as with most things in life. As DPY pointed out in our “Attempting the William Hung Path to Celebrity” post- it’s just good old-fashioned, honest, hard work that will enable you to reach those dizzy heights.

Nevertheless, there are those out there making a living from blogging as a “real job” and kudos to them. Why shouldn’t they? They write better and more engaging articles than half the “real” offline journalists. And so..if I could impart a message to these bona fide “pro bloggers“- don’t be shy, go for it!

Case in point with perhaps the most successful “pro blogging” site out there: problogging.net run by Darren Rowse. I’ve read a lot of his posts and they’re excellent- & he’s obviously very active with promoting “pro blogging“, but when it comes to telling us about his earnings- which is surely one of the chief goals of pro blogging, Darren becomes amazingly reticent. While this is quite endearing, it’s also something to get over and shout from the hilltops. Usually he escapes the question by providing another link, hoping that the effort of further navigation will deter us! So that even with the post “How Much Do I Earn From Blogging” one doesn’t actually get a straight answer, but rather a series of self-deprecating excuses (are you sure you’re not English?)

This is a question that I get asked more than any other. I was brought up not to really talk about money and what you earn so I’m always hesitant to do so – but due to the large interest in the subject I’ve from time to time given some indication (it can be vague) of what kind of money blogging brings me. Remember I have 20 blogs and these figures are not just for this blog (in fact this blog makes very little).

But I think we get the idea with “I’m a six figure blogger“.

Well done, mate. It’s nothing to be sniffed at. And if you are in college or just graduating, so say from age 18-25, it’s not bad at all. Or if it’s just a side-income. But if you’re getting a bit longer in the tooth and its your fulltime job, then $100,000 really isn’t going to cut it. Health care, diapers, kids’ education, mortgage payments, the wife’s Gucci handbags- you name it- $100k doesn’t go far in this day and age.

And for such obviously intelligent people as Darren Rowse is- it’s nothing in comparison as to what he would earn in a white collar job- whether it be in the stockmarket or any corporate set-up. The achievement here is in that blogosphere remains so “amateur” in nature- that to make six figure earnings per annum is remarkable in relation to the earnings of other bloggers. But in itself, it’s really no big deal at all.

So what to do? If you’re really thinking of going “pro” with blogging- I’d take in some of the conventional marketing wisdom passed down by the likes of Matt Gagnon (mazu.com) and the late Corey Rudl (marketingtips.com). There is nothing these guys like doing more than selling their own success stories to make more money. I think Corey was making about $4 million per year at the time he died so tragically in that car accident. Now there’s a tidy sum…

Of course, there are some total scoundrels out there calling themselves “pro bloggers” just because they’re egomaniacs who believe their own propaganda. Well, it’s not like they’re giving out accredited diplomas for the status of “pro blogger“. Now there’s an idea, Darren. How about starting a membership club for pro bloggers...?

[tags]pro blogging,pro bloggers,darren rowse,blogging for money, blogging for profit,problogging.net,corey rudl, matt gagnon[/tags]

We’ve been getting a series of complaint emails from Gawker over our Gaming Blog, in terms of the domain name “Kotaku” and, thus far, no agreement or settlement has been reached. When you look into it, there is some interesting case history in terms of trademarks vs. domain names. To see an excellent legal summary, visit the Harvard Law website.

One good case example, some time ago, was between eToy.com vs. eToys.com as it is, like many of these cases, a David and Goliath story. And, perhaps surprisingly, in most instances- the courts have favored David. If one searches through the Domain Name Handbook Dispute Diaries – most courts have found that the registering of a domain is simply the taking of an opportunity, unless the registrant is falsely posing as the company with a specifically registered trademark. In other words, based on case history, it’s an extremely cumbersome case to prove and the bar is set high.

And this is in the United States, where anti-cybersquatting laws have been passed by Congress and work in conjunction with ICANN’s UDRP. But when one starts getting into the foreign laws and less established TLDs- it becomes a maze almost impossible to unravel.

Let us deal with ICANN’s Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policies-:

The policy provides that all domain name registrants must submit to mandatory administrative proceedings if:

1. the domain name is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark in which the complainant has rights; and

2. the domain name holder has no rights or legitimate interests in the domain name; and

3. the domain name has been registered and is being used in bad faith.

There are four factors in the policy listed as evidence of bad faith registration and use:

1. circumstances indicating that the primary purpose is to sell or transfer the name to the trademark owner or competitor for consideration in excess of direct costs related to the domain name; or

2. history of registration in order to prevent the IP owner from reflecting their mark in a domain name; or

3. registration primarily for the purpose of disrupting the business of a competitor; or

4. intentional attempts to attract users to your site for commercial gain, by creating a likelihood of confusion as to source or endorsement.

If any of these apply, then the registration is in bad faith. However, if the domain name holder has a legitimate interest, then a trademark holder will not win under the UDRP. The policy lists 3 factors as evidence of legitimate interests:

1. use or demonstrable preparations to use the name in a bona fide offering of goods or services before notification of dispute; or

2. if the entity or person was commonly known by the name even if it has no trademark rights; or

3. legitimate, noncommercial or fair use of domain name without intent to misleadingly divert consumers or tarnish the mark at issue.

But here is the problem as pointed out by Harvard Law....

There is some question regarding the enforceability of the registrar agreements both inside and outside the United States. These agreements could be considered contracts of adhesion since registrants have no other options for registering a name in a gTLD.

In our case, the name “Kotaku” is actually in honor of a 17th/18th Century Japanese artist and we do have declared interests outside of the US. For example, see our Japan Blog and major Japanese website. Does a US trademark supercede a Japanese trademark or patent?

Furthermore, the UDRP requires not only that the domain name was registered in bad faith, but that it is being used in bad faith as well. Nowhere in our Gaming Blog do we claim to be Kotaku.com or anything to do with the “brand” developed under that trademark, by Gawker.

The fact is that, as “Goliath“, Gawker had ample opportunity to register the .net version of Kotaku.com. That they chose not to is their own oversight. It should not be incumbent on us, “David”, to lie down and be trampled on- just to protect the interests of those who have been remiss in their online business strategies. Are they seriously saying that by registering a trademark in the US, this gives them an immediate right to all ICANN domain names for that name? What a bargain that would make all trademark registrations!

By caving into demands that are beyond reasonable, one would open the door for corporations to be able to impose trademarks on a huge amount of words/phrases that might be otherwise considered as “generic” or part of the “public domain”. Should Johnsons have a trademark right over all ICANN domains for “Baby Shampoo“? The mind boggles…

This is not in any of our interests. Don’t the Goliaths have enough advantages already in the online marketplace?

And so, while we may lose this particular battle..it will not be without a fight.

[tags]gawker,kotaku,domain name disputes,icann,udrp,cybersquatting,etoys,harvard,gaming,japan[/tags]

The Bloggy Network picked up an interesting blog last weekend at sitepoint. Quoting from the auction:

Buzzword Hell was a blog I started whose mission was to condemn all the buzzwords that floated around our industry. It’s a blog with a very unique system in that it “condemns” buzzwords to the circles of hell from Dante’s Inferno. Each buzzword is condemned based on the number of comments it has gotten.

It certainly is a very clever and original idea! And also some interesting backlinks; for instance from wikipedia’s page on buzzwords and an interview by Ben Bleikamp on his old College Start-Up blog.

Current “buzzwords condemned to hell” include-:

* Ajax

• Bandwidth
  
• Beta
  
• Blogosphere
  
• Folksonomy
  
• GYM Free
  
• Information Superhighway
  
• Live Search
  
• Meme
  
• Pagerank
  
• Paradigm Shift
  
• Progressive Enhancement
  
• Realign
  
• SEO
  
• Social Networking
  
• Spear Phishing
  
• Synergy
  
• Thought Leader
  
• Web 2.0
  
  

  BuzzwordHell.com is the creation of Bryan Veloso, known by his followers in blogosphere as “rock star”. Bryan is a member of the 9 rules network through his personal website: AvalonStar.com. He has worked for Facebook and Automattic, while achieving genuine “celebrity blogger” status through such landmark posts as his “Saying Hello to Aries” and the launch of his own WordPress theme: “Chaotic Soul“.

  
  

  Bryan has some good tips in his 9 rules interview for any wannabe “celebrity bloggers” out there. Amongst them, some modest advice-:

  
  

  I’m proud to say that I feel I have one of the most dedicated reader bases out there. For what reason? Why do they keep coming back? I really couldn’t tell you. I could assume, but then I could be making an ass of myself. Hmm… I try to talk to people like they’re right next to me, I try to be conversational. I don’t think there is any other way blogging should be. Blogging is a conversation between multiple parties. I’m a huge believer in transparency, which means that I never hide anything from my readers.

  
  

  [tags]bryan veloso,buzzwords,star bloggers, rock star,live search, web 2.0,9 rules,facebook,sitepoint,wikipedia[/tags]
  

As promised, I’m following up my previous post on the DMCA- trying to make sense out of the madness, as I perceive it. So I asked Jonathan Bailey of Plagiarism Today a question regarding my main concern-:

Are 3rd parties like this allowed to write to a host and request such drastic action without going through some sort of formal procedures? Otherwise anyone can just do this as an act of sabotage?

Here is his answer to this-:

“The honest answer to your question is yes, no and maybe.

The DMCA itself only allows two groups of people to file a notice. The copyright holder or a “designated agent” to act on their behalf. That agent is usually an attorney that has a legally signed document declaring them to be an agent on file.

So yes, it is possible for a third party to file a notice- but only with a valid contract to do so. Being a designated copyright agent is a fairly big deal and not something you can assume you have.

The exception to the rule is if your site happens to be in the EU. The EU has a similar notice and takedown provision to the U.S. but there is no specific requirement as to who can file the notice. Theoretically at least, anyone, even a perfect stranger, can file the

notice.

That, potentially, makes situations like this dangerous in the EU. You and I can reach a pact to allow reuse of some of my work, someone else notice the infringement and then file a complaint with your host, getting the work removed. This hurts both of us.

The only way I know to guard against that is add a tag line saying that it is “used with permission from” and then give the site name.

Still, even that is no guarantee.

This is something that the EU is going to have to work out.”

For those of you with sites in the EU that this may concern, I followed up with another question to Jonathan-:

When you say “in the EU”- would that mean where the site is hosted or the location of the domain registrant? And doesn’t this get confused with hosting resellers being located outside the US, while the main server is in the United States?

To which he responded-:

“EU deals with the host. The domain registrant has nothing to do with it.

Ponder a scenario here. If a Russian plagiarizes an Australian author but uses a U.S. Web host, the Australian man would use a DMCA notice to get the work removed. Similarly, if the Russian chose a host located in the EU, the Australian would go through those procedures.

It’s a matter of where the data is stored physical and which country “owns” the server. It is interesting when you get to matters of collocation, which can put a single site across many different countries, but in those cases you focus on the main one.

ThePirateBay has used that rub to keep their site alive, despite multiple copyright threats.”

This answer from Jonathan far from put my mind at rest!!

The laws in the US need reviewing now and the EU has to attend to their chaotic interpretations even more urgently.

Watch this space.

I tried to resist writing this. Really, I did. But the ramifications are just too great. Most of you will know the amount of time and effort that goes into building and sustaining a website- especially a blog, and the thought that it can all be taken away by some random absurdity is too much to bear. Welcome to DMCA Madness.

This all started when we purchased JOAB from David Krug last July. There was a running dispute between him and Dan Zarrella about the site’s ownership- and, more relevant to us, the content on the blog we had just purchased. The upshot was that Dan Zarrella threatened us with a DMCA if we didn’t remove all content written by him and we did a post “What’s the deal with a DMCA?” exploring the consequences as far such a threat was concerned.

One upside to that episode was gaining valuable insights from an expert in this area- Jonathan Bailey from Plagiarism Today. Apart from leaving a lot of useful comments, emailing me thorough explanations (& advising that we did indeed take need to take down Dan Zarrella’s content), he also authorized us to use his content on some new anti-plagiarism software coming onto the market called Blogwerx. These included posts like “The Need For Sentinel” and were posted under Jonathan’s own username “copyspy”, which was a link back to Plagiarism Today.

All well and good. Water under the bridge. And then what? Unbelievably, out of the blue- we get an email from Blogwerx:

There are several blog posts that seem to have the exact same content as other locations. This content has been scraped and I would ask that you take it down in accordance with the DMCA.

Okay…fair enough…you think that they might have been pleased with the plug, but they probably don’t know that we had Jonathan Bailey’s permission- so we’ll just write back to them and let them know. No harm done.

But here is where the madness sets in. We get another email from Blogwerx, minutes later (allowing no time for the “personal request” or “warning” to be responded to)- but this time it’s to our email at imandhost.com -:

All of the content located on www.jackofallblogs.com has been scraped from other locations. This is an infringement of US copyright law and the DMCA. I would ask that this site be removed from hosting or the entire account for this user be removed. If you need further information please feel free to contact me.

Notice the change in language. From “several posts”, we now have “all the content”. And “locations” in the plural…

So let’s just recap. Having received permission from an author to publish his content reviewing a particular product, we receive a request from the developer of this product to take the content down as it is “scraped”. And allowing zero time for a response to clear the matter up, this third party- who is not the owner of the content and has no rights or claim to it, is writing to our server- not only asking that this blog be taken down, but for our whole user account (what- 200 sites?) be removed?

Seriously dangerous stuff as a precedent. As it turned out, the matter was resolved quickly and amicably. Jonathan Bailey confirmed with the people at Blogwerx that he had given his permission for us to publish his content. He also confirmed that he had no knowledge of their threat and that he had not instructed them to act on his behalf in such matters. And kudos to Blogwerx, they came back with a sincere and genuine apology. So no hard feelings there.

Still, it completely freaked me out that, as a precedent, a third party- who does not own or have any rights to the content in question, does not act for or have the permission of the content’s owner- can issue a DMCA threat to a server (which must, by law, be acted upon) and that this be within the boundaries of the current laws governing the internet. Where the hell is the common sense there?

So I’m going to be revisiting this matter in the coming days to clarify exactly where one stands with this DMCA madness- as I’m sure that you, like me, would like to protect yourselves not just from plagiarism, but also baseless claims against your website which can, regardless of the merits, cause you a great deal of trouble.

These days, I see these “celebrity blogs” going up left, right and center. We at Bloggy Network are guilty of it too- with our own Hollywood Blog. The question is why the hell do we bother? It is at its best a complete and utter waste of time, but a good laugh. At its worst, it’s just sad pandering to the fickle shallowness of a bored readership.

Good revenue, good stats. I get it. But I just pray that there is some equanimity and it doesn’t last. It certainly doesn’t deserve to. Seems that the “snarks” are trying to jump on the celebrity blog bandwagon as well. The problem is- they’re not very good at it. When posting “where is the real snark?“- I realized that there is an element of femininity to snark, but it doesn’t really translate from its core nastiness into genuinely funny, bitchy humor in this area. Again, one finds that the best celebrity blogs are written by gays, like The Superficial- but their bitchiness is in their ability to be witty and cruel, rather than just aimlessly stirring pots.

Where are the philosophers, the poets, the Nobel Peace winners, the scientists- the people that actually have something to say? They may not be “beautiful”- but personally, I’d be more interested in seeing them have prime time interviews than these bit-part idiots. Being snide apart- it’s all fine as fun and games, put in the correct perspective. That is- that beauty really is only “skin deep”. And that these people are supposedly “artists” in a world of “make-believe”. I love to watch an actor and actress in any given role and of course “looks” matter, but it is the character that they play, as if they are a court jester to us- the court, that matters- not what lies behind the mask. Just like when one looks at a painting, first one admires the work of art, rarely even knowing the hand that made it. Anybody who is “obsessed” with “fame seekers” is, quite frankly, very ill or very sad. Some of the blogs that we have reviewed at Bloggy Award in this area- really do worry me. For example, “Jake Watch” literally stalks the every movement of Jake Gyllenhaal.

Enough said. I probably sound like an old pompous fuddy duddy.

There was a time when I was young and beautiful myself! To cut a long story short, I had an amazing connection called Roger Corman, a mover and shaker in Hollywood. So for a while I got “on the circuit” and met quite a lot of the “stars” up close and personal. They were never what one expected. In fact, on the whole, a dreadful disappointment in their “normality”. I’m not going to reel off a whole load of name drops and it seems a terribly long time ago anyway- but I would say that the famous comedians I met were deadly dull!

As far as their rights to privacy are concerned, I find it double standards. They are biting the hand that feeds them. One might not include celebrity blogs in the “paparazzi paranoia”- but they use and discard them in a similiar fashion through their duplicitous actions and desperation for attention, good or bad.

And that brings me full circle to the original point I was trying to make. These blogs about celebrities are trying to become “famous” themselves as uncensored commentators. If you’re going to try that- you’d better be buying your own BS before anyone else does. Otherwise it’s just more regurgitated c..p about the same stuff everyone already knows- that is… for anyone who is gripped by this nonsense.

Quimby’s tiger was released from his soul over Paid Text Links Ads and Google’s policy on them. Or my post about it…whatever. Ah well…paid or unpaid links, Matt Cutts slobbering and Google worshipping aside, surely we can find something more approriate to release our soul’s energy over?

I dunno…where shall we start? Global Warming...Starvation in Africa...War in the Middle East. You name it. There’s a whole host of issues, that we as responsible, reasonable and educated people (hopefully) need to discuss and search our souls over. Or not. Maybe you are on an internal journey, seeking enlightenment. But splitting hairs over Search Engine policies towards paid text links is a tangent of an abstract issue, at best, and while it’s definitely worth discussing, it’s about as unspiritual as you can get. It doesn’t matter what, if any, your God (or faith) of choice is, but none of them would encourage you to link your soul (pun intended!) to such a trivial matter.

Of course, my tongue is firmly in cheek here! It is great that those who write and contribute on JOAB can openly disagree. What a boring world it would be if we all did agree. And Quimby made some good points: one that sticks to mind is that most of us who work in developing websites are often way too obsessed with Google’s power and the pagerank it gives to a website.

And ironically, since my post last week wondering whether Google was updating, Matt Cutts (more slobbering here, Quimby....) has, for the first time ever, recently posted a clarification on Google’s policy towards pagerank. To quote a couple of segments relevant to our own questions at JOAB-:

If you don’t care about PageRank and your site is doing well, that’s fine by me.

I believe that I’ve said before that PageRank is computed continuously; there are machines that take inputs to the PageRank algorithm at Google and compute the resulting PageRanks. So at any given time, a url in Google’s system has up-to-date PageRank as a result of running the computation with the inputs to the algorithm.

I’m not sure if I’ve given the official word on a PageRank export before. It’s not a big event here at Google. Frankly, I didn’t even know we’d done our 3-4 month-ish push of this data. When I saw people talking about it online, I went to check and see whether it was a real push or not.

So while you may be happy to see that the Google Toolbar shows a little more PageRank for a given page, it’s not as if that causes a change in search results at that point. So you won’t see any search engine result page (SERP) changes as a result of this PageRank export–those changes have been gradually baking in since the last PageRank export.

Quimby....let’s call this one even….

If you are like me- then you spend way too much time in front of your comp. You have probably let some other part of your life slip- maybe your health or your relationships. A lack of balance usually comes hand in hand with a lack of perspective. Personally I justify it as “temporary” and that I’m doing it “because I have to“, i.e: for the money.

Hmmm. Maybe that’s a load of codswallop. Maybe I can earn less money and have more fun. Maybe I could be happier as a person with a more rounded life if I stopped worrying so much about money. I hate letting anyone down, but just sometimes the darned emails can wait….

Good old Benjamin Franklin reputedly changed the word “profit” to “happiness“, as in “the pursuit of….” while drawing up The Constitution. Point being- money does not bring happiness.

It’s not just a cliché told by the rich to the poor, it’s the truth. For those of you who have not had the chance to witness the irony of seeing rich people you know personally- utterly miserable, or the smiley, innocent disposition of people in the Third World who are dirt poor, there is an excellent illustration of this concept by an old school chum of mine, Alain De Botton, in his book “The Consolations Of Philosophy“. Below, is part of his reflection on the teachings of Epicurus.

1. Identify a project for happiness.

In order to be happy on holiday, I must live in a villa

2. Imagine that the project may be false. Look for exceptions to the supposed link between the desired object and happiness. Could one possess the desired object but not be happy? Could one be happy but not have the desired object?

Could I spend money on a villa and still not be happy?

Could I be happy on holiday and not spend as much money as on a villa?

3. If an exception is found, the desired object cannot be a necessary and sufficient cause of happiness.

It is possible to have a miserable time in a villa if, for example, I feel friendless and isolated?

It is possible for me to be happy in a tent if, for example, I am with someone I love and feel appreciated by?

4. In order to be accurate about producing happiness, the initial

project must be nuanced to take the exception into account.

In so far as I can be happy in an expensive villa, this depends on being with someone I love and feel appreciated by.

I can be happy without spending money on a villa, as long as I am with someone I love and feel appreciated by.

5. True needs may now seem very different from the confused initial desire.

Happiness depends more on the possession of a congenial companion than a well-decorated villa.

Epicurus himself sums it up best:

The possession of the greatest riches does not resolve the agitation of the soul nor give birth to remarkable joy