Doug Heil vs Linkworth: Grab Your Popcorn Spammers!

119 comments

Linkworth is apparently threatening legal action against the crew at IHY for calling the company email spammers. The thread in question is here. Linkworth sends the legal threat in the middle of page 2:

Well I appreciate the kind words you guys have for our company. There is one thing called "freedom of speech" and there is another thing called "libel and slander". If you have a problem with our company, either kindly ask us to not email you anymore, or take it up with the proper authorities. Labeling our trademarked name with an improper term like "spammer", can be brought up in the court of law, and we will be more than happy to defend our company and our name.

I will kindly ask that you remove all libel comments regarding our company name and it's representatives. There will be no more requests or comments, only legal action. We have put a lot of money into our company and if you don't like it fine. We do like our company and we will spend whatever money necessary to preserve it's name and reputation.

I will allow you 24 hours to remove our company name and representatives name from your site before moving forward. The current time is 2:45pm CST. I will check back at 3pm CST tomorrow. I hope you believe my threats because I am 100% serious.

Doug closed the thread, saying that it ran its course, but Linkworth blasted Doug on their blog, offering him some choice anchor text and sound bytes:

It seems this guy’s sole purpose in life is to flame other individuals and other companies. “Why?” We have no idea, other than possible jealousy, greed, attention or maybe he really thinks he is an expert. It is obvious, however, he is an expert blackhat seo, an expert spammer and an expert flamer.

So Doug opened the thread back up. On page 7 now. The long and short are technically defining email spam, cross referencing user names and IP addresses, a rant in every post, and a few other goodies if you are looking for a laugh.

The thread has got too long to read easily and is now continued here

Comments

Funny thing..

1. I haven't looked at old Doug's forum for months. He seems to have a new photo of himself since I laast looked (not the one that we know and love, that seomike posted in the Pure Pants thread).

2. Looks as if Doug has started to boost his exposure, perhaps in order to garner votes in Aaron's "wanker of the year" competition.

PantsRank

>"wanker of the year" competition

pure pants competition... get your shit together mate!

I think my compitition is far harder to influence than PageRank or the SERPs. I only accept one quality editorial vote per person, and with the numbers in so far I am fairly certain that Doug will not be able to manipulate them.

Blast...

...I didn't even vote for DH

bad batch

on fucking drugs?

If so, I think they are the ones that should be avoided at all costs!

Never get high...

...on your own supply.

Is DH really what we think he is?

ARRRGGHHH!

I'm so sick of wimpy Americans hiding behind their lawyers. Lets get back to settling disputes the old fashinoned way. Take it outside and duke it out! Setup a webcam and let us watch too.

Wankers?

Hey mate I know what you mean but that's the way it is. I'm a Brit living and loving the US - I'm never going back to my native UK - ever!

BUT some wankers DO hide behind lawyers

One thing I do miss about Blighty is the take the wanker out the back and settle it with a good old fashioned beating.....

Those were the days.....

Very scary forum that.

Very scary forum that. Whoever coined the phrase "White *pointy* hats" wasn't joking...

if only...

Lets get back to settling disputes the old fashinoned way. Take it outside and duke it out! Setup a webcam and let us watch too.

If only you can get past the lawyers, you may have just thought of a great business model.

It's about time

It's about time that someone sued, Doug. He's been waiting for it to happen, I'm sure, but it never does. (I'm sure he wants the publicity it would bring.)

We can only hope that Linkworth actually follows through with it, even if it does give him publicity. But I doubt they will. It's just too much work these days.

[added]Reading their blog post, it looks like they're not threatening a law suit after all. Oh well.

How is it...

...that anyone is actually dumb enough to connect their business to their personal vendettas?

Real PRO's, the lot of them.

IHY Administrator

Quote:
It's about time that someone sued, Doug. He's been waiting for it to happen, I'm sure, but it never does. (I'm sure he wants the publicity it would bring.)

Jill, weren't you an Administrator at IHY at one time?

Jill, weren't you an

Jill, weren't you an Administrator at IHY at one time?

There were a few names on the IHY forum staff for a while, but most if not all have long since left.

Looks like a duck

It seems there are a lot of people that belive Linkworth spams. I think DougH is a twat, but he doesn't seem to be far off in this instance.

yep

Quote:
Jill, weren't you an Administrator at IHY at one time?

Yep, until I finally woke up to the lunatic that is Doug.

But in my defense, if you read the old posts there, you'll see that I rarely agreed with him on much. In fact, that was one of the reasons I stayed there so long, was to counter balance his crazy mixed up posts.

Amen, enndot

And it's super-smart to put "I hope you believe my threats because I am 100% serious" in writing.

Nice little quote on the ihy thread today

Quote:
He's not doing well - the 'usual suspects' will always join in, but who cares? No-one that matters. Even seobook has only managed to get three of his threadtwisters to join in - and none of them has anything original to say.

And any insult from those kind of people is all kudos to Doug; once the scum show they are scared, there's another good reason to respect Doug.

post by mod Quadrille, who posts here as seo2seo

post by mod Quadrille, who

post by mod Quadrille, who posts here as seo2seo

But not often ;o)

haha!

They tried to google bomb him for 'blackhat seo!" I did this about a year ago; got hit with a libel threat and subsequently removed it, but it's still #30ish :-)

I'm so sick of wimpy

Quote:
I'm so sick of wimpy Americans hiding behind their lawyers. Lets get back to settling disputes the old fashinoned way. Take it outside and duke it out! Setup a webcam and let us watch too.

I do agree that many companies do hide behind lawyers. However, if someone is causing harm to your business by stating something that is false, I see no reason why you should not sue. My problem is when companies come out and use lawyers to scare people away from stating true things. But if Linkworth doesn't spam, then they have every right to sue someone from defaming their name.

Quote:
They tried to google bomb him for 'blackhat seo!" I did this about a year ago; got hit with a libel threat and subsequently removed it, but it's still #30ish :-)

A libel threat for how you link to someone. That would be an interesting case to play out in court. You could have always just changed it to something that he would appreciate like Doug Heil is not a blackhat SEO. Or that the forum hates search engine spammers.

Finally, I don't know much about Linkworth, but they are making a mistake. First, posting in the forum is in itself giving credibility to the forum in question. Most threads there are filled with 3 or 4 of the moderators riding Doug's jock. By commenting on it and in essence adding fuel to the fire, they've now just gained unwanted publicity. He should have let the thread die like most over their when the stooges got tired of talking to themselves.

If they were serious, they'd have just had their lawyer send over the C&D no questions asked. No need to give message board warnings. If the matter was really serious to their business, they wouldn't be playing around with a forum that most people realize doesn't hold much credibility in the space.

Isn't being the most

Isn't being the most annoying SEO spam kind of in itself??? LOL

ethics?

Isn't being the most annoying SEO spam kind of in itself???

It depends if you do it ethically.

Do I need a restraining order?

Just read that IHY thread and it appears that Doug is threatening me over there:

Quote:
Her time is limited.

That's kinda scary. I'm just glad he doesn't live anywhere near me. I wonder if I should notify the authorities or anything? It's pretty obvious the guy's a lunatic, and I've heard that threats like that from crazy people should be taken seriously.

Guess he's afraid I might spill the beans further about his umm..."presentation" at SES that one time. (Notice how he closed the thread after somone mentioned that?)

Wanker?

I couldn't agree more.

I've been doing search for years (before G) and I have to vote that you must be posting about the biggest most arrogant wanker I've had the pleasure of crossing.

I'm usually low profile but had to get my oar in there....

What happened to that mouthy cow setting up a search engine??? JOKE

Reading this thread I

Reading this thread I thought it was sad to see everybody picking on Doug. Especially Jill. You guys were like a couple back in the day.

And some hypocrit posting in this thread blogged about how ugly infighting was.

But then I went over to IHY and read up a bit. Haven't been there in ages. I see he's accusing me of being a spammer (predictable) and of owning a lot of web directories which I never owned, and one which I did own at one time. It's stuff like that - off the wall statements with no basis in reality - that lost him his credibility.

But still, I don't think he's violent. Just a sad case of one man's career being destroyed by poor judgment. I don't like ogrish, and I don't like watching the fall DH. He's got issues, but he is human and I'm sure threads like this don't help. :)

I'm sure threads like this don't help. :)

Nor posts like that, John. :)

Pawn to Queen Three

On Linkworth Blog

Quote:
Removed Entries Explanation

To those of you asking what happened to our recent posts about our fun tiff, due to our attorney’s request, we have removed everything about the situation. We will post further comments when and if we are allowed to.

Posted in Text Links March 27th, 2006 by Administrator | No comments

Does removing something

mean it never happened?

Nah

Means Linkworth has no balls and cowers to a C&D from a loon.

He's still a wanker

inne??

I just saw your nick..

and I so so love it.

:)
-Heather

Whats up guys...

I periodically read threadwatch because I like the format...quick and to the point. I was surprised to see the IHY/LW being spoken about here, hence me finally chiming in. Thought I would give you guys a little follow up on what is happening.

We are speaking to our attorneys about what is being said over there. We believe they have the right to speak their mind, but somethings are taken way out of context and should not be referenced at all. If our attorneys feel we have either a trademark infringement or libel issue, things will progress. They are aware of the comments we made and "our" attorney's asked us to remove it, we did not get a cease and desist letter...I don't think attorneys work that fast ;-)! They've asked us to keep details to a minimum until they say otherwise, so that's all I can say at this point. I'll check back and fill you guys in when we have the green light.

He does have great pictures of himself though...doesn't he! :-)

Removing something doesn't

Removing something doesn't have to mean they've taken anything back. It could be that their attorney told them to take it down so they wouldn't look stupid while this moves forward.

But who really believes this is going to go anywhere? Do people really sue each other over one of those "you were mean to me" "well, you were even meaner" situations?

If there really were a lawsuit, it could mean the end of Springer Forum Marketing, and that would be such a shame.

Truly a Shame it would be...

Quote:
If there really were a lawsuit, it could mean the end of Springer Forum Marketing, and that would be such a shame.

I moderated at IHY for a couple of years more or less in a silent mode. I enjoyed the comraderie behind the scenes in the mod area. I got de-modded for my lack of moderation which I truly understand.

I continue to read IHY on a regular basis. Doug has definitely established a niche for himself and no one else out there has the cahoneys to do what he is doing. Most of us have the common sense to not do that. But hey, it has worked well for Doug and the community and I personally enjoy the atmosphere over there. I'm all for standards, best practices, etc. and Doug does an excellent job of putting those who choose to buck the system on the spot. Some are definitely worthy of the publicity that is generated from IHY.

Lawyers? Who needs them? Sure, Doug flys by the seat of his pants and may possibly cross the line into litigation issues but, who else is brave enough to expose those in this industry for the dirty deeds that they do? Someone has to do it and IHY has established itself as the authority on the subject.

So, what do you do? Best thing would have been not to feed the machine which you did. Further feeding is only going to escalate this into more digging and research and are you sure you want your bottom exposed to the public? Think about it.

If you are that concerned about the integrity of your company, you will have remained silent at the public level and have your lawyers issue a C&D which is the first step in this type of litigation. Doug will comply and you won't have anything to worry about. Idle threats, trying to defend your position, etc. are all only going to add fuel to the fire. It's all part of the process.

Nothing more than Springer

Quote:
who else is brave enough to expose those in this industry for the dirty deeds that they do? Someone has to do it and IHY has established itself as the authority on the subject.

If that's what he and his mindless brainwashed followers did, that would be one thing. But if you actually read there, you'd see that a good percentage of the time, that's not what it is. It's just them stirring up trouble trying to bring others to post there so that they can gain some tiny bit of credibility.

For instance, when Doug really gets bored, he posts to one of his I hate Danny Sullivan threads, and then waits for Danny to come defend himself.

That sure has nothing to do with being an authority on anything other than the biggest ass hat in the industry. (Or largest pants or whatever that pants thing was!)

But I do read there...

Quote:
If that's what he and his mindless brainwashed followers did.

Jill, let's not forget that you at one point were part of the group, and an Administrator to boot!

Quote:
But if you actually read there, you'd see that a good percentage of the time, that's not what it is.

I do read there and I pretty much stick to the Best Practices Forums as that is where most of the juicy stuff is. I see the exact opposite of what you are stating in that most of what Doug and the crew expose is exactly what they say it is. In fact, I'd say they are on target 8 out of 10 times.

This particular issue is between the parties involved. Personally, if I were the company in question, I'd be cleaning up my backyard first before even considering legal recourse. The problem is, when you are guilty as charged, legal recourse may not be an option. I'm not saying that the company in question is guilty, I'm just saying that their backyard better be clean before they take this to the next level. It's a Catch 22 situation.

I've seen the claims and have followed the topic since it started. I've come to this conclusion...

If it walks, talks and smells like a duck, it must be a duck. Wouldn't you agree? Again, this is no indication that the company in question must be a duck. ;)

P.S. Did you happen to review the examples of the unsolicted emails that were sent? That in itself solidified in my mind what the issues are and I may concur with Doug and the crew on quite a few things mentioned in that topic.

P.S.S. Man, this popcorn is fattening!

how bored

or drunk or high do you have to be to read a thread Doug posts when he gets bored?

Quote:
For instance, when Doug really gets bored, he posts to one of his I hate Danny Sullivan threads, and then waits for Danny to come defend himself.

So lets say...

So I guess it is fair to say that seoconsultants.com sells directory listings to boost those advertisers rankings in the search engines? And if it is not, then make sure you don't defend yourself because all that is going to is make you walk, talk and smell like a duck. I mean all I have to do is look at your website and it shows all I need to see to solidify my point.

Then lets take a look at your posting name..."PAGEONERESULTS". I believe it's the Google guidelines that clearly indicates anyone that can guarantee top placement is someone to be very careful of. So due to your name, which solidifies itself, it is fair to say you are one who spams the likes of google, yahoo, msn and the rest because how else would be able to promise and announce "PAGEONERESULTS"? Oh, don't fuel the fire because that wouldn't make any sense. It will only show you are guilty of my "fly by the seat comments".

Then lets talk about your own website pageoneresults.com. Reading through your site (nice design ;-) .... I see you have a section on "linking". In the text it says,

Note: Avoid naming your links pages links.htm or whatever underlying technology you are using (file extensions). Avoid naming your sub-directory /links/. We wouldn't be surprised if the term links is now classified as a poison word

But lets be honest here...I don't know you and how you operate, so it is not fair to you or your business for me to make those comments. It's no different with them. They use not so whitehat techniques on their own site, so they are as much a spammer as the guy in the next cubicle....according to their 'authority' rules.

FWIW

Quote:
How bored or drunk or high do you have to be to read a thread Doug posts when he gets bored?

It works. Not in the way Edward means, but they do draw people in and it gets personal and ugly (and entertaining) pretty quickly. Maybe I should clarify the use of the term Springer Forum Marketing. Sometimes satire is very true.

I was on staff there too, for much longer than I should have been. I didn't resign until August of last year. I haven't posted there since, and I think that's the trick to keeping it entertaining. There's no point in debating, clarifying, or correcting. Read, enjoy, and laugh it up, but never ever take the bait to post.

Obviously....

It may work, but it seems more people despise the guy and his tactics than appreciate him. Seems like making libel remarks on others is no different than the claims he puts on others.

In all honesty...

Quote:
So I guess it is fair to say that seoconsultants.com sells directory listings to boost those advertisers rankings in the search engines?

Nope, you are incorrect. Although some may think a listing in our directory will boost their search engine rankings, I'm not too certain that it would. ;)

Quote:
And if it is not, then make sure you don't defend yourself because all that is going to is make you walk, talk and smell like a duck.

In our defense, we do walk, talk and smell like a duck, we have nothing to hide just as I'm sure the company being discussed has nothing to hide.

Quote:
I mean all I have to do is look at your website and it shows all I need to see to solidify my point.

Which website?

Quote:
Then lets take a look at your posting name..."PAGEONERESULTS". I believe it's the Google guidelines that clearly indicates anyone that can guarantee top placement is someone to be very careful of.

I don't guarantee anything, never have and never will, it's not possible. My username has a long history behind it along with about 88,300 results in Google which are all mine. Yes, I know, get a life! Hey, the Internet is my life. It's what allows me to hang out at the pool and participate in the great topics at TW and my other favorite hangouts.

Quote:
So due to your name, which solidifies itself, it is fair to say you are one who spams the likes of google, yahoo, msn.

Me spam? lol! You definitely don't know me. I'm a W3 groupie and don't know what spam is. To me, spam is defined as UCE and also clearly defined in CAN-SPAM. And, SPAM (note the ALL CAPS) is a trademarked term for a favorite luncheon spread here in the states.

Quote:
But lets be honest here...I don't know you and how you operate, so it is not fair to you or your business for me to make those comments.

Actually, if you are caught with your hand in the cookie jar, you get smacked. If your hand doesn't hurt, then you don't have much to worry about. Hopefully the copies of the emails being posted as examples at IHY are not from the company in question. If they are, I can see a counter lawsuit being filed. We live in a litigous country and if you have some money burning a hole in your pocket, I'm sure you can find better things to do with it than initiating lawsuits for something as trivial as this. And yes, it would be trivial if you are not guilty of the offense. If you are, then that is something you need to contend with. Doug and the crew are just calling it like they see it.

Doug's Methods

Quote:
It may work, but it seems more people despise the guy and his tactics than appreciate him.

You may be correct in that assumption. But, that doesn't stop the truth from being the truth, he just happens to have a knack for speaking the truth even though it is definitely over the line at times. I've had to step in a few times myself to bring old Doug back on track but that's Doug and Doug will be Doug.

Quote:
Seems like making libel remarks on others is no different than the claims he puts on others.

I won't disagree with the fact that Doug has a unique way of getting under your skin. But hey, he's not gotten under my skin and I really don't need to worry about it. I'm just here for the popcorn damnit!

understood...

and just to make sure you understand my comments, what I said about you and/or your site is not anything applicable. Simply trying to make a point.

Yes Edward

Quote:
Jill, let's not forget that you at one point were part of the group, and an Administrator to boot!

Yes, Edward, you already mentioned that earlier, and I already agreed that was true. And you were a moderator as well. And so was Qwerty, Dan Thies, RobWatts, Scottie, MakeMeTop, Alan Perkins, and many other very smart individuals.

But you'll notice there are no more very smart individuals who hang out there any more. That kinda tells you something, no?

People Change

Quote:
But you'll notice there are no more very smart individuals who hang out there any more. That kinda tells you something, no?

Well, I wouldn't go that far. I will agree that we've all changed and have ventured into different communities, activities, etc.

I think when you are surrounded by a particular mindset for too long, it get's old and you move on. When you take yourself out of that environment and become the outsider looking in, you gain a different perspective.

Quote:
But you'll notice there are no more very smart individuals who hang out there any more.

I wouldn't phrase it that way. I might say that the smart individuals are still there and have very thick skin, they are tolerant. There is a continuing ebb and flow with fora and IHY goes through the same changes that most others do. Doug just happens to have a very unique personality. ;)

to each his own. ;-)

to each his own. ;-)

Serious?

Quote:
who else is brave enough to expose those in this industry for the dirty deeds that they do? Someone has to do it and IHY has established itself as the authority on the subject.

Dirty deeds? It's HTML for christ sake, not selling enriched uranium. The only thing I've seen it become an authority on is being the laughing stock of the industry.

Hmm thePhenomenal I can

Hmm thePhenomenal I can feel your confusion. That is only natural once you start to approach the Dark Side...

;)

if you are caught with your

if you are caught with your hand in the cookie jar

If you are never caught with your hand in the cookie jar then you must not share the love for cookies that I and others know.

HTML?

Quote:
Dirty deeds? It's HTML for christ sake, not selling enriched uranium.

No, we're not talking about HTML in this topic. We're talking about UCE and the marketing methods used in that UCE.

Quote:
The only thing I've seen it become an authority on is being the laughing stock of the industry.

It's a great marketing tactic, wouldn't you say so? How many topics are here about IHY? And at other Fora? I'd call that viral. :)

Quote:
If you are never caught with your hand in the cookie jar then you must not share the love for cookies that I and others know.

lol! My hand hurt at one time and I got flushed from the top ten, that was years ago. That's when I decided that cookies were just too damn fattening for me.

Actually, if you get caught these days, you probably deserve it. That means you are probably doing something incorrectly and left your ass open for getting caught. If you are going to play, expect to pay your dues at some point. It's that whole Karma thing, you know?

HTML? Again, this topic has nothing whatsoever to do with HTML.

UCE - Unsoicited Commercial Email

Shall we bring this topic back on track. For the poster who states that it is just HTML, read the freakin topic first and then respond! ;)

Instead of bashing Doug for his uncanny way of exposing crap for crap, why not look at the reason Doug got involved in the first place. Did you read the original UCE that started all of this? It violates quite a few of the guidelines in the CAN-SPAM Act. If you are a US based company and sending out emails like the one that started this ball rolling, what do you expect? Did you expect a warm welcome and for everyone to respond to your email about how they aren't in a certain position when in fact they are? Isn't that a bit deceptive? Wouldn't that be classified as deceptive advertising?

So, can I assume that all the defenders of the company being questioned approve of the methods that are being used? If so, then the "Signal" is gone from TW. Sorry, but you're missing the entire point behind all of this. The company in question appears to be sending out UCE. Not only that, but they are in such a high risk industry that they should expect to come under fire from the Doug's of the world. What is the company in question going to do when Google nukes their network? Are you going to sue Google because you no longer have a site in their index? You might as well, that seems to be the latest trend.

How are you going to handle the client complaints? Do TWer's remember Zeus? History repeats itself. If you choose to engage in activities that may be classified as not being best practice, then you also choose to take the risk and associated fallout. Right now, the fallout has begun. There's this big blip in the middle of G's radar and it may have the company's name in question right in the middle of that blip. I've seen it happen over and over and over again. It's this viscious cycle and people just don't get it!

So, back to the UCE. Can I assume that most of you find the original email sent to be acceptable?

Given the choice between UCE

Given the choice between UCE and irrational and false accusations without any basis in reality, I would choose UCE.

You don't have a choice...

Quote:
Given the choice between UCE and irrational and false accusations without any basis in reality, I would choose UCE.

Can I get your answer to the above question John? Do you find the original email that was sent to be acceptable? And, does it meet the guidelines as specified in the CAN-SPAM Act? Ignore all the other stuff and focus on what caused all this to come to a head.

You see, it's easy to sit here and try to hide the underlying issue behind all of this. You can bash Doug and whomever else that you want, heck, bash me if you want, I actually enjoy it. Feed my sickness! I think many have lost perspective on this. It is now an IHY topic and not what was originally in question. Shall we get a copy of that original email and point each and every thing that is wrong with it? Does the company in question want their backyard dug up? If not, then I might suggest that you refrain from the UCE.

And I'm sure someone is going to come along and say that the recipients were optin. lol! Optin from where? A scraped email list? A CD of 100 million email addresses for $49.95 USD. And, if they are truly optin, why isn't there an optout choice which is required by the CAN-SPAM Act?

If you are going to play in this league, you should do your homework first. It's great that the UCE is being sent from a US based company and US based servers. That in itself is like putting a sign on your back that says "hey, kick me, I'm an email spammer". And we all know what the general public thinks of email spam.

Can I get your answer to the

Can I get your answer to the above question John?

We all get spam and we all deal with it. I have some very long term clients which I acquired through by sending them unsolicited emails offers my services. That was years ago, and I don't take new clients any more so it must have been effective to some degree.

Ignore all the other stuff and focus on what caused all this to come to a head.

I would recommend you do the same. Ignore the UCE, and ask yourself why the Doug Heil name is what it is today. Why are people defending UCE to bash Doug Heil? Think about that.

You can bash Doug and whomever else that you want, heck, bash me if you want, I actually enjoy it. Feed my sickness!

Last I checked, you and DH were cut from the same cloth, so it's not really necessary.

A CD of 100 million email addresses for $49.95 USD

I doubt it was a list at all. Most SEO's doing this kind of marketing are trying specific search terms, seeing who is advertising and then looking up contact email.

Well of course it's UCE. The

Well of course it's UCE. The problem though is that Doug and the IHY crew manage to alienate any sane thinking person with the insults/name-calling/threats and white-hat religious extremism that flows through the posts there.

I'm trying to remember the last time SpamHuntress bollocked me for visiting TW...

Are you still mad at me John?

Quote:
Last I checked, you and DH were cut from the same cloth, so it's not really necessary.

lol, are you still mad at me for not giving you any exposure at the directory? Sorry, I just can't bring myself to that level, especially with the clueless SEO contests.

Quote:
I doubt it was a list at all. Most SEO's doing this kind of marketing are trying specific search terms, seeing who is advertising and then looking up contact email.

Yup, the original email received would lead you to believe that, wouldn't it? Where in the AdWords guidelines does it state that someone can send you unsolicited email that may be deceptive in nature? I wonder if the people receiving the emails are as forgiving as you. I'm going to guess that most don't get them anyway as they get flagged by the spam filters.

lol, are you still made at

lol, are you still made at me for not giving you any exposure at the directory?

Not mad at you Edward. Did my comments seem emotionally charged? And are you referring to the one link you gave me at one time on the SEO forums page? I doubt that one link would have a huge impact on my traffic. It doesn't seem to have saved IHY.

I said you were cut from the same cloth because you both seem to have an unhealthy fixation on spam, and tend to pass weird judgments on people. In your case, people who profit from Adsense, and in Doug's case people who profit from SEO.

Spam?

Quote:
I said you were cut from the same cloth because you both seem to have an unhealthy fixation on spam.

John, I'm going to add you to my new Clueless SEO Directory if you keep it up!

http://www.seoconsultants.com/clueless/seo/

Can you show me where I have a unhealthy fixation on spam? And please, my definition of spam all relates to email. You'll rarely find me using the term spam when discussing HTML and general SEO issues, tis not my forte.

Quote:
In your case, people who profit from Adsense.

Damnit, it's AdSense, not Adsense!

I'm an AdSense publisher so where does that comment come from? If you are referring to the SEO Consultants Directory guidelines, those are there for a reason. Understand the reason first and you'll have a clue.

Back to the question. Did you find the original email that is being discussed to be acceptable and within the guidelines of the CAN-SPAM Act. Stop skirting the issue and answer the damn question. :)

That's not what this thread is about...

Edward, this thread isn't about whether Linkworth are spammers or not. Sure, it sounds like they are, just as that other place I pointed out here awhile back, that Vine something or other are email spammers.

But who cares?

This thread wasn't started by Aaron to decide if they were spammers. It was simply to enjoy the farce that is IHY.

And if you seriously believe there's anyone with half a brain who is a moderator or regular at IHY, then you may want to be examining your own brain because you may have been lobotomized while you were sleeping or something.

9/10 of the posts there are forum spammers who try to get away with link drops. They edit the posts, but leave them up there so they can bash them, and that's exactly what they do. There's no actual information there ever. It's bash this, bash that. And the other funny thing is even if I've got nothing to do with whatever they're bashing my name (or initials) (or the phrase 'she who cannot be named') seems to come up in every thread too. Get over it Dougie. Let's see if you can go a week without you or your minions mentioning/bashing me. I somehow doubt it will happen.

John, I'm going to add you

John, I'm going to add you to my new Clueless SEO Directory if you keep it up

Cool, does it get me a damn link?

Can you show me where I have a unhealthy fixation on spam?

Here: http://www.seoconsultants.com/links/s/p/a/m/

Did you find the original email that is being discussed to be acceptable and within the guidelines of the CAN-SPAM Act.

Edward, I live in Japan to get around the CAN-SPAM Act so you're asking the wrong person. :P

But seriously, I don't give a rat's ass about the CAN-SPAM Act. I prefer not to spam people because it isn't the most effective marketing and tends to piss off a lot of people. If you believe they were acting illegally, why not report them to the authorities?

That's my new twist!

Quote:
Cool, does it get me a damn link?

I'm still laughing! Sure, you can have a link. Two of them if you use two emails in your unsolicited request. ;)

That's my new venture damnit! I'm taking a new approach to SEO. After all these years of promoting those who have a clue, now it's time to promote those who are clueless.

Quote:
Edward, I live in Japan to get around the CAN-SPAM Act so you're asking the wrong person. :P

Touche!

Quote:
But seriously, I don't give a rat's ass about the CAN-SPAM Act. I prefer not to spam people because it isn't the most effective marketing and tends to piss off a lot of people.

Bravo John!

Quote:
If you believe they were acting illegally, why not report them to the authorities?

Sorry, that's not my MO. I'll let Doug and his crew deal with that. I have enough measures in place to keep those emails out of my inbox. Actually I just loosened up a few things so I can get more of them. What have I been missing out on?

Then maybe...

Quote:
Edward, this thread isn't about whether Linkworth are spammers or not.

Then maybe the thread should be titled differently. And maybe the opening quotes changed to reflect the true content of this topic which is an IHY whining thread.

Quote:
But who cares?

Apparently you don't anymore. You did at one point but somewhere along the line you got blindsided. When you look in the mirror and turn left, do you see one face? When you turn right, do you see another face? I'm serious Jill, your comments are out of line based on your past reputation in this industry. So, if you want to continue to ride the fence, be prepared for what may come your way.

Quote:
This thread wasn't started by Aaron to decide if they were spammers. It was simply to enjoy the farce that is IHY.

Enjoy at who's cost? Dougs? Yours? Ours? What about the company in question. Are they enjoying it? Aaron may have posted this thread as being light-hearted but it is exposing some serious issues that the named company may have to contend with.

Quote:
And if you seriously believe there's anyone with half a brain who is a moderator or regular at IHY, then you may want to be examining your own brain because you may have been lobotomized while you were sleeping or something.

Thats it Jill, I'm sure many here at TW would gladly say that about you and your community too. How would that make you feel? You're swimmin' with the Sharks girl, you're in the big league now. :)

Quote:
9/10 of the posts there are forum spammers who try to get away with link drops. They edit the posts, but leave them up there so they can bash them, and that's exactly what they do.

lol! From my perspective, the forum spammers deserve it. How much of your time or the time of your moderators is spent dealing with forum spam? Doug just happens to approach it from a different perspective. Let them spam the forums and in the process get raked over the coals for it. Truly a viral concept!

Quote:
There's no actual information there ever. It's bash this, bash that.

Okay, I'll agree that the bashing does get a little old at times but that is the nature of IHY and once you accept it, you deal with it. I've learned to deal with it in a positive way. And, there is plenty of information over there if you know what you are looking for.

Quote:
And the other funny thing is even if I've got nothing to do with whatever they're bashing my name (or initials) (or the phrase 'she who cannot be named') seems to come up in every thread too.

You should feel honored Jill that your name even crosses their lips. Actually, you should feel very honored that the folks here at TW allow you to participate. ;)

Quote:
Get over it Dougie. Let's see if you can go a week without you or your minions mentioning/bashing me. I somehow doubt it will happen.

lol! Remember that movie about the ventriloquist who could not keep his dummy from talking (it was one of those scary movies)? Well, that is what you are up against. There is no way that Doug can go a week without mentioning his favorite ex-admin. He likes you, deal with it. :)

Hi Pot....It's Kettle

Isn't that a bit deceptive? Wouldn't that be classified as deceptive advertising?

Not one thing deceptive about it. It's the same things you tell your own customers.
http://www.pageoneresults.com/linking/

Did you read the original UCE that started all of this? It violates quite a few of the guidelines in the CAN-SPAM Act.

It lacked TWO parts of the entire act.

What is the company in question going to do when Google nukes their network? Are you going to sue Google because you no longer have a site in their index?

Nuke their network? I thought you knew what you were talking about.

And I'm sure someone is going to come along and say that the recipients were optin. lol! Optin from where? A scraped email list? A CD of 100 million email addresses for $49.95 USD. And, if they are truly optin, why isn't there an optout choice which is required by the CAN-SPAM Act?

It's hard to optout of a list that doesn't exist.

If you are going to play in this league, you should do your homework first.

Hi Pot, meet kettle

Good one rono...

Quote:
Hi Pot, meet kettle.

Nice to meet you.

Quote:
It lacked TWO parts of the entire act.

Whew, clueless eh? Does that mean if I have a client site penalized and/or banned by a search engine I could come back and say, "well, I only went outside the guidelines in two areas".

There is no inbetween in the CAN-SPAM Act. You either adhere to it, or you don't. You can't take what is there and leave out a couple of things and think that you are following the guidelines, it doesn't work that way.

Quote:
It lacked TWO parts of the entire act.

Can you show us which two parts it lacked?

I think you assume the worst

Deliberate? Absolutely not! Lesson learned? Absolutely. Corrected? Definitely.

Can you show us which two parts it lacked?

I thought you knew already? ;-)
http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/conline/pubs/buspubs/canspam.htm

no contradictions Edward

Quote:
Apparently you don't anymore. You did at one point but somewhere along the line you got blindsided. When you look in the mirror and turn left, do you see one face? When you turn right, do you see another face? I'm serious Jill, your comments are out of line based on your past reputation in this industry. So, if you want to continue to ride the fence, be prepared for what may come your way.

Guess you HAVE been reading over there a lot!

Guess what though, Edward? Where did I ever say that I like spam either email or SE? Where do I ever say anything other than I've always said for years on this subject? Find me where the contradictions lie? You won't find them because there aren't any. If you associated what I say with anything Doug's ever said, then you're the one who's had me mixed up. But you can read anything I've written since I've been writing, and you will not find any contradictions with what I stand for and have always stood for.

I did know already...

Quote:
I thought you knew already? ;-)

I did, I just wanted to see if you knew and if you could kindly tell us which of the 2 (out of 4 by the way) guidelines you did not follow? So, that means that you sent out an email that is classified as UCE and followed half the guidelines on the sending of that email? Something there just doesn't seem right to me.

Dougs extremism makes all

Dougs extremism makes all moderate marketers into spammers. In his eyes there is no grey areas. Do you buy a link, even for traffic - is there a no-follow on it just to be sure? Christ.

So, if you want to continue to ride the fence, be prepared for what may come your way.

Fence? You must be kidding. It's a bloody great valley down here with Doug up there in a tower screaming at the fellers on the other hilltop. Luckily this is where all the actual work gets done so it could be worse :)

Hmmm, half a brain?

Quote:
And if you seriously believe there's anyone with half a brain who is a moderator or regular at IHY, then you may want to be examining your own brain because you may have been lobotomized while you were sleeping or something.

Jill, let's pose that question to those mods who mod at your forum and also at IHY. How do you think they would feel knowing that their community Administrator thinks they have half a brain. If I were any one of them, I think I'd be turning in my keys now and looking for a new community.

Half a brain? Ouch! That's pretty much the same as calling someone Brain Dead and/or an Idiot.

Viral Marketing

Quote:
It's a bloody great valley down here with Doug up there in a tower screaming at the fellers on the other hilltop.

That's only because people here and at other fora provide the venue for Doug to stay in that tower screaming at the fellers. Some listen, some don't. I know for a fact that Doug actually enjoys seeing these topics as they confirm his belief that what he is doing is working. And, if you really sit and think about it, it is working. Maybe not the way some of you see it, but I can see the forest through the trees in this instance.

Jill, let's pose that

Quote:
Jill, let's pose that question to those mods who mod at your forum and also at IHY. How do you think they would feel knowing that their community Administrator thinks they have half a brain. If I were any one of them, I think I'd be turning in my keys now and looking for a new community.

The number is lower than you think, Edward. Lots of us at HR are former IHY staff, but only one person moderates at both at this point.

That being said, there are a few people I respect at IHY, but they all steer clear of the personal attacks.

Can we assume...

Quote:
But only one person moderates at both at this point.

Okay, can we assume that the one person who does mod at both has half a brain as Jill has so eloquently stated above?

I think you just admitted

Earlier you said...

It violates quite a few of the guidelines in the CAN-SPAM Act.

Now you say

I did, I just wanted to see if you knew and if you could kindly tell us which of the 2 (out of 4 by the way) guidelines you did not follow? So, that means that you sent out an email that is classified as UCE and followed half the guidelines on the sending of that email? Something there just doesn't seem right to me.

So how do you get "quite a few" out of 4? Also, if you refer back to the act, there are 4 main and 11 additional provisions.

I'm not real sure what your point is. I've not read one single comment that says it never happened. So why you continually point it out makes no sense to me. Are you saying you are perfect? Never made a mistake before? I'm sure I could find plenty of laws you have mistakenly violated "quite a few" provisions of.

The point is they cross the line and people shouldn't have to defend their names. If you feel that isn't the truth, let me point out a previous conversation we had...

So I guess it is fair to say that seoconsultants.com sells directory listings to boost those advertisers rankings in the search engines?

Nope, you are incorrect. Although some may think a listing in our directory will boost their search engine rankings, I'm not too certain that it would. ;)

And if it is not, then make sure you don't defend yourself because all that is going to is make you walk, talk and smell like a duck.

In our defense, we do walk, talk and smell like a duck, we have nothing to hide just as I'm sure the company being discussed has nothing to hide.

I mean all I have to do is look at your website and it shows all I need to see to solidify my point.

Which website? ***********all of them

Then lets take a look at your posting name..."PAGEONERESULTS". I believe it's the Google guidelines that clearly indicates anyone that can guarantee top placement is someone to be very careful of.

I don't guarantee anything, never have and never will, it's not possible. My username has a long history behind it along with about 88,300 results in Google which are all mine. Yes, I know, get a life! Hey, the Internet is my life. It's what allows me to hang out at the pool and participate in the great topics at TW and my other favorite hangouts.

So due to your name, which solidifies itself, it is fair to say you are one who spams the likes of google, yahoo, msn.

Me spam? lol! You definitely don't know me. I'm a W3 groupie and don't know what spam is. To me, spam is defined as UCE and also clearly defined in CAN-SPAM. And, SPAM (note the ALL CAPS) is a trademarked term for a favorite luncheon spread here in the states.
Oh, W3 means you're perfect? Guess I need to become a W3 groupie so I can be immune too

But lets be honest here...I don't know you and how you operate, so it is not fair to you or your business for me to make those comments.

Actually, if you are caught with your hand in the cookie jar, you get smacked. If your hand doesn't hurt, then you don't have much to worry about. Hopefully the copies of the emails being posted as examples at IHY are not from the company in question. If they are, I can see a counter lawsuit being filed. We live in a litigous country and if you have some money burning a hole in your pocket, I'm sure you can find better things to do with it than initiating lawsuits for something as trivial as this. And yes, it would be trivial if you are not guilty of the offense. If you are, then that is something you need to contend with. Doug and the crew are just calling it like they see it.

According to what he says he preaches, you are as much of a spammer as anyone else. Have you noticed anyone that is not part of his clan is a spammer?

That's only because people

That's only because people here and at other fora provide the venue for Doug to stay in that tower screaming at the fellers. Some listen, some don't.

Well I agree with you on that point Edward.

if you really sit and think about it, it is working.

Hardly. His kind of extremism simply pushes everyone towards the middle ground. His 'with us or against us' attitude alienates most people. Look at this thread, Doug's made a understandable complaint about UCE and we're still loathed to agree with him. :)

Extremism?

Quote:
Hardly. His kind of extremism simply pushes everyone towards the middle ground.

Let's expand on the Extremism term a bit. I do believe there are a few here guilty of that including myself (especially when it comes to the W3). But, if I remember correctly, we have a few here who are extremists when it comes to the issue of hat colors (Doug included). Personally, I think you are doing more harm in this industry than Doug is. You've given the public labels to put on those who are in this industry and the labels are totally irrelevant and not applicable. White Hat? Black Hat? Gray Hat? WTF is that? Is that just some way to classify something you don't know jack shit about and give it a hat color?

And rono, a suggestion from someone who has been down this path before. If you are not a fault here, then I would request that Aaron remove this topic altogether. Unless of course you want the added exposure. I can assure you, that if you keep at this on a public level, the sharks are going to have a field day at your expense.

Okay, so you admit to making a mistake. So move on and post an apology if that will help any. I would suggest that the next time you decide to send out UCE that you carefully review the pros and cons before doing so. As you can see, the cons far outweigh the pros especially if Doug and his crew or any of their clients are on your list.

And, as a personal note, I'm not too sure Google would take kindly to you sending UCE to their advertisers. In fact, I think they would be downright furious. You can be assured that this topic and all the others that are public have just put you smack in the middle of their radar. All because someone without a clue in your company decided to send UCE to Google AdWords Advertisers and that UCE is being construed as deceptive advertising. It's going to take you a bit to recover from this but hey, we all learn from our mistakes.

BTW, I have absolutely nothing to hide and will take any stones thrown my way. After participating in these type topics for years, I can tell you that you are only digging yourself deeper into the hole. Get out now, while you can and while the company in question still has some brand to grow on.

Shall we bring this topic

Quote:
Shall we bring this topic back on track. For the poster who states that it is just HTML, read the freakin topic first and then respond! ;)

The topic had steered toward discussing the forum as a whole, not the Linkworth issue. I read through some of the threads there and never seen people so upset with other people's websites. I'm sorry if my post was off topic, just stating that it seemed they go to some major extremes over there.

No hats

We're pretty much past the WH/BH arguments here at TW. That's just not the purpose this place was created for. But if you want credentials, I have never (not even once) cold-called or sent an email seeking work, cloaked, keyword stuffed, sent an automated link request, or any of the stuff that could be used to label me as "evil," but that's not the point.

I don't straddle the fence, but I also don't see the point in outing people. All it accomplishes is flaming, and doesn't teach anyone as much as simply describing practices that I view as unwise, dishonest, or unethical. I can tell people "don't do this" without adding "this guy did it and he's the scum of the Earth." The latter method serves to draw tha accused into a fight that always (feel free to show me an exception) turns into personal insults and people acting like stupid children. And that is not education.

heh...

And, as a personal note, I'm not too sure Google would take kindly to you sending UCE to their advertisers. In fact, I think they would be downright furious. You can be assured that this topic and all the others that are public have just put you smack in the middle of their radar. All because someone without a clue in your company decided to send UCE to Google AdWords Advertisers and that UCE is being construed as deceptive advertising. It's going to take you a bit to recover from this but hey, we all learn from our mistakes.

**We've been in the radar Edward, thanks for the heads up though. Guess we all need a clue.
**Deceptive advertising? Where's the deception? You speak circles with no validity. V3?
**Contacting Google advertisers? Are you on the same drugs as "the others"? (Lost reference)
**Digging our hole deeper? The hole is dug. No apology is necessary to someone that says what they say. In other terms, sure, we'd happily do it. I will admit, you've given me tired head and I'm done with this. I appreciate your candor and responsiveness. Look out for our 'legal' UCE coming to an email box near you in the future!

Look, I get it. You and Doug breathe the same air.

Proactive vs. Reactive

qwerty, I agree with you wholeheartedly.

On a parting note, if rono is affiliated with the company in question, here are my suggestions.

  1. Have this topic sent to the bin immediately. Send a request to Aaron.
  2. Take it like a man and admit to your mistake and maybe even post a public apology. That's the only thing that will get the sharks off your back at this point. Although I do think this has probably passed the point of no return.
  3. Go back to business as usual and hope this blows over quickly.

Why would I suggest the above? Because I know that is probably your only alternative right now outside of litigation which is only going to backfire based on the research performed to date.

Also, you are now forced into Damage Control. All this stuff is getting indexed by the minute and will remain in search engine caches for quite some time. Heck, with Google, your apt to find this stuff appearing 6, 9, 12 months down the line. Is that what you want a prospective client to find? You'll now be forced to work extra hard to keep this stuff from finding it's way into the top positions for your company name. And it will make it's way there, mark my words.

You just don't get it

I would prefer our side be found on the engines. Thanks for thinking of them though.

Qwerty

.... I remember that name! He was one of the very very few that came back with a good non confrontational comment.

In other words I didn't feel a "wanker" when Qwerty got in the mix

Good guy.

David

Okay rono, you asked for it...

Quote:
Deceptive advertising? Where's the deception? You speak circles with no validity.

Okay, let me validate the deception...

Quote:
I can't find you anywhere in the top 100 natural listings for that keyword! You NEED my help. I boost my clients to the top of the natural listings for their target keywords with GREAT success through effective Link Building campaigns.

Hmmm, if I'm not mistaken, I do believe that some of the recipients of these emails can show you that they are in the top 100 natural listings for the keywords you've specified. Am I wrong in thinking that statement is somewhat deceiving?

P.S. That is just one small part of the email. I'd be happy to go through it with you line by line, including the subject line, email headers, signature, etc.

only one hold out

Quote:
Jill, let's pose that question to those mods who mod at your forum and also at IHY.

Like who? There aren't any left. The smart ones all left awhile ago. No wait, I'm sorry you are correct. There is one good mod still at IHY, Chrishirst. Why he hasn't left, I couldn't tell you. I have no idea if he posts there still or not, but last I checked he was still a mod. He's the only one we still have in common. I would imagine he'll eventually leave too, but that's certainly his decision. Sometimes it's difficult to leave because the backroom stuff is even more amusing than the front end stuff!

Let me define deception

You must have a different definition of deception than the dictionary

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deception
Deception (or mystification) is to intentionally distort the truth in order to mislead others. Deception is involved in propaganda and game theory (to deceive the opponents). Deception, rather than falsehood, is the essence of the lie. Thus, fiction is not true by definition, but is not taken as a lie or a deception. The reader of fiction has the duty to protect himself from deception. What one believes to be true is not a lie, though not true. Thus, freedom of speech gives the right to express statements that are in fact not true, and which may or may not have the intent to deceive.

Where exactly are we lying to people? Do you know exactly what we do to help people? You are being completely presumptuous because you have no idea. We DO help people, much like I'm sure you help people.

Or is it safe to say if we lie to people, then you lie to people. We make the same claims you do and unless you have some secret potion no one knows about, you probably provide the same results we do.

http://www.pageoneresults.com

Ok pot, this kettle is getting back to work. Nothing you can say will prove your point, much like nothing I can say will prove my point. But I honestly do appreciate you allowing me to explain our side of the story for anyone to read. You had some hard hitting questions that were the exact questions anyone that reads might have, so we are glad to have a voice. And you can tell your bud that we're not going to spend anymore time on attorney side of things. Based on their lack of credibility, we've deemed it pointless.

(Aaron...thx for letting us speak up and take space...)

The Deception...

Quote:
Where exactly are we lying to people?

Ummm, right here I believe, this is just one instance...

Quote:
I can't find you anywhere in the top 100 natural listings for that keyword!

That covers the first line of your Wiki definition.

Quote:
Look, I get it. You and Doug breathe the same air.

No, actually, we all breathe the same air. That's where you got lost.

Do you know exactly what we do to help people?

Based on what I've read at the site in question, I am well aware of what you do to help people. As long as it continues to help them, then you don't have anything to worry about. But when those people start finding themselves MIA in the SERPs and they can track it back to a link campaign that they participated in, then be prepared. I'll be the first to respond to that topic and let you know that I told you so..

Who should get out why they can?

So you openly admit to being presumptuous.

I think 'you' might want to ask to have this thread removed. Our name was already thrown in the mud, you've done nothing but throw your own in with us. ;-)

The child in us...

Quote:
You've done nothing but throw your own in with us.

Yes I have! And you know what? I enjoyed playing in the mud. It's nice to get out every now and then and have some fun. If my name is now mud, so be it. But, I don't think that is the case.

Instead of trying to turn this topic around and put me in the spotlight (which I've probably done well enough on my own), you should take the advice given and move forward with your business.

On a side note, take great care in what you say and do with your marketing message, especially in your industry. Stuff like this, is sure to give the wrong impression to a search quality engineer...

Quote:
The difference between LinkWorth and other linking companies is simple: we offer the ability purchase inbound links without having to reciprocate.

Also, stuff like this...

http://www.google.com/search?q=pagerank+site%3Alinkworth%2Ecom
http://www.linkworth.com/stats.php

Is bad Karma!

Quote:
They need to understand we do not base selling the text links off of PageRank.

Then why do you have PageRank values listed with all of your statistics? Think about this for a moment. How do you think that looks to Google? What type of audience are you attracting? As soon as you mention the term PageRank on your site, you are at risk. And, I don't care if you are attempting to debunk the myth that PageRank isn't everything. In reading through your forums, you've definitely attracted the crowd that is going to get your ass banned, you watch.

Quote:
An example of services this person is referring to is:
http://www.textlinkbrokers.com
http://www.textlinkbrokerage.com
http://www.linkadage.com

Oh, the more I dig, the more I find. It's funny how you denounce your competition in the way that you do. I do believe those are all avid advertisers here at TW too!

Dude, you got me started...

This is just way too much!

Quote:
21. Solicitation of partner websites in any shape or form is strictly prohibited. Partners are not allowed to actively contact LinkWorth advertisers trying to sell links through LinkWorth or around LinkWorth. This is a form of spam and will not be tolerated.

http://www.linkworth.com/support/tos.php?menu_selection=prt

The above is item #21 from your own TOS. Pot calling the kettle black?

You definitely qualify for a Clueless listing...

You've got your advertiser inventory sitting out there being indexed by Google. Your showing statistics that I'm sure Google really doesn't like you to show. You've basically got your link partners out there on the radar with you. Are they all aware of that? I mean, is that common practice in the links industry? To expose your inventory to the search engines like that?

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.