Them and Us
Jun 19 2005
I have a problem with the 9rules network.
Sure, it’s attracted some big reasonably well-known names – Keith Robinson, Greg Storey, Mike Papageorge, Mark Boulton, Sergio Villarreal – who individually generate some great content on a wide range of subjects (there are other authors in the ‘network’ writing on non-web-related issues; I’m sure they’re writing good stuff too), but it’s the concept of this über-bloggers club that I don’t like.
You’d have to be blind not to be aware that the whole 9rules set-up (I’m talking about from early last year, when it was just Whitespace, the CSS Vault and Version 2, plus a few Amazon affiliate stores) is another in a long line of money-making schemes dreamed up by Paul ‘Scrivs’ Scrivens, self-styled “hardest working man on the web” (although his output does seem to have slowed recently), ‘cult of personality’ marketing genius, and generally a dude who is far too smart than someone in his early 20s has a right to be.
Now, I don’t have a problem with Paul himself (although it has been known to happen occasionally); what leaves a bad taste in my mouth is the fact that the essentially democratic and levelling nature of blogging – if you create something of value or of interest then people will read it; the Field of Dreams “write it and they will come” principle – is being subverted in the name of the almighty dollar. Sure, I know that some of the network sites do not (currently) carry advertising, but they are still participating in an exercise in traffic generation with the aim of increased revenue (and bearing in mind the expanding e-commerce arm of 9rules, with various affiliate sites selling completely unrelated products, all of which are accumulating Googlejuice from the thousands of incoming links from far-flung blogs around the web, is the financial model really as weighted in favour of the authors as Paul suggests?)
The question also has to be asked: is the mere fact that you are part of the ‘network’ likely to change the subject matter and the frequency of your entries? I’m sure all of the current participants would respond in the negative, but it’s got to figure somewhere in the decisions you make about how and what you write, particularly if your traffic has risen dramatically as a result of membership – “if I wrote more about [subject], my AdSense income would be $XXX instead of $XX” – so as well as lending artifical weight to posts by member sites, the ‘network’ may also be lessening the relevance (and interest) of those posts.
And how can that be a good thing?
In the blogosphere it is natural for communities of like-minded individuals to gather together and form virtual social networks. Buffy fans, Trekkies, crochet addicts, coprophiliacs – you name it, there will be a set of sites on the subject all incestuously linking to each other. In the web-standards world it is exactly the same; we all read the same sites, comment on the same news stories, pass on the same memes... in short, we are one big, happy family.
But what happens when a group within that family band together to create their own little clique, and whisper in corners about how to expand their sphere of influence? Well, inevitably there will be some who feel that this disruption to the family unit is going to be a harmful one. Particularly when the motivating factor is money.
I for one won’t be clamouring for a coveted position in the 9rules network line-up when the second round of sign-ups rolls around. I believe that it creates an atmosphere of ‘them’ and ‘us’ – and I would much rather be one of us than one of them.
Filed under: Musings, Internet.
Bookmark this article with del.icio.us
Previously: CSS Reboot - The Top Ten
Next: Fix my 'fox
Comments
- trovster
- 1204 days ago
- You’ve made some extremely good points on this matter. I’ve never thought of it as “them and us” and don’t knowingly read any/many of the WEB development 9rules network sites.
I definitely see your point about the type of content produced. I’m not sure whether the type will change, however, I think the depth of the articles will reduce with more and more smaller articles to keep punters ticking over. - #2
- Kev
- 1203 days ago
- I know what you’re saying Matthew and it is a troubling development. What we have here is essentially, when its stripped right down to its bare functionality a directory. The purpose of a directory is to up the CTR (click-thru rate) for its members.
Now there’s nothing wrong with that so far as it goes but what all directories do is remove the onus on the creation of interesting content and replace it with reciprocal or one way link farming. If those of us who study Google etc are correct about the way these engines intend to take search forward, then these sites could find themselves penalised in the long term.
Personally, I can’t imagine not reading Keith Robinsons site as some of his stuff is so close to my way of thinking or Mark Boulton as his stuff is fascinating to someone who is interested but not an expert in Marks’ field but I’m a sophisticated enough user to not assume that that level of quality automatically follows for the rest of their stablemates – no offence to them or their sites – and I would imagine the same applies for most visitors to their sites. - #3
- Keith
- 1203 days ago
- Well, to me it’s sort of an experiment. There is a reason why I didn’t put Asterisk into the network. Mainly I didn’t see how it would be beneficial to me or my readers.
My new site though, To-done, seemed to be a fit. Honestly I don’t know if it was worth it, but I wanted to check it out.
Now, as to the content. I’ve not seen any evidence in the network of anything nefarious or of anyone writing to appease Google or get more click-through.
Look at Weblogsinc for that. ;)
I also don’t see any reason why Google would have a problem with the network.
I can see your concern with it, but I honstly don’t see it in an us/them way at all.
I would like to see things evolve into something a bit more beneficial for the reader, like maybe adding an editorial level to the network, and we’re actually talking about that.
Look, I can’t speak for everyone, but I’d not have signed up if I didn’t think it had something to offer me and wasn’t impressed with the overall quality of the content.
There are simply too many sites to keep up with and I think networks of some sort can really help cut some of the noise. If this creates an us/them situation it’s just and unfortunate side effect.
Now is that 9rules? I don’t know yet. Give it some time though… - #4
- Kev
- 1203 days ago
- “I also don’t see any reason why Google would have a problem with the network.”
Well, I’ve learnt to be overly paranoid about the inner workings of engines – they’re maintaned mainly by nuance-impaired scripts. For example its only now that I feel comfortable introducing sIFR on my site and I wouldn’t do it at all on a commercial site.
Don’t get me wrong though Keith – maybe ‘penalised’ is the wrong word but the days of directory based backlinks and same-themed links are well and truly numbered. - #5
- Graham Bancroft
- 1202 days ago
- I don’t know enougth to comment on the above but I really do admire your honesty.
- #6
- Matthew Oliphant
- 1201 days ago
- "The question also has to be asked: is the mere fact that you are part of the ‘network’ likely to change the subject matter and the frequency of your entries? I’m sure all of the current participants would respond in the negative…"
Speaking solely as a member… I will actually respond positive, not negative. My subject matter hasn’t changed, but my posting frequency has.
I am not doing it for more adsense clicks, I am doing it because more people are visiting. Hits and pageviews are the highest they have ever been on my site thanks to the 9rules.com inclusion. For me, more visitors actually gives me more incentive to create more content.
Not for the money, sorry to disappoint you on that point, but because it energizes me to do it. It’s fun.
I have 5 times the number of pageviews since 9rules.com started. My adsense clicks are up by 1.5 times. Basically I am still in adsense-cover-hosting-costs mode. Which is fine by me.
Now, from a I-helped-start-it point of view… keep watching. I am not saying you will eat your words, but I think you have taken an overly negative view of what 9rules.com is doing. If you really feel us vs. them, well I am sorry about that. We aren’t letting just anyone in. I think it’s initially heavy on the Web design because that’s the crowd that follows closely what Paul does.
Let me know if you would like to talk about this off-blog as well. - #7
- Mike Rundle
- 1201 days ago
- Since Matto answered some stuff from a member’s point of view, I think I could drop some insight as a part of the team who runs 9rules.
"You’d have to be blind not to be aware that the whole 9rules set-up is another in a long line of money-making schemes dreamed up by Paul ‘Scrivs’ Scrivens."
To be completely honest, if it was “just another weblog” that Paul was going to run to put food on his table (he’s does the blog thing full-time btw) I wouldn’t be so excited about it. Here’s my overarching goal for 9rules: to be the place where regular (technical and non-technical) web users can go to find weblogs and websites on their favorite topics. I want my mom to find tons of gardening weblogs without using Google which is difficult for her to use. And on the author end of the plan, I’d like for the 9rules Network to make web writers feel more appreciated by having more eyes on their work. For me, this has nothing to do with money on any side of the project, it’s simply trying to change the face of the web.
Are we taking lots of money from bloggers for their hard work? Absolutely not. Our terms with each member are confidential, but I can say that the vast majority of money that writers generate goes straight into their pockets. 9rules empowers site authors with 1) more traffic, and 2) (if wanted) the ability to become entrepreneurs and start making money off their hard-work. Think of 9rules as a catalyst, where joining the network makes you want to become a better blogger because now you have 5x the eyes looking at your work.
9rules isn’t about the best web designers cliquing together to form a secret handshake club. 9rules is about finding the best content on the web, regardless of topic, and trying to organize it so others can enjoy it more easily. Like Matto said, we’ve started out with design because those are the people who “know” us already and would be most receptive. We’re already branching out into other genres, and we won’t rest until someone who wants to read about spelunking in South America can find 5 weblogs on the topic. Until the best hollywood screenwriter blogs are all under one roof. Or until there’s a list of 25 gardening weblogs for my mom to read everyday.
For me it’s not about making money. It’s about changing something for the better. - #8
- Bryan
- 1201 days ago
- Well, I run a golf website, FAR FAR away from the typical digital design /web type of blogs. Most of the members probably hate golf, but I got accepted because they liked my content. I don’t post based on the money my site makes (which is VERY small) because I don’t get a TON of traffic. That isn’t 9rules fault, that is the fact that people don’t want to read a golf post over a post about something web related. Being a part of the network is certaintly cool, but I was a no name before, and I am a no name now. It hasn’t thrown me into some ‘cool zone’ where only the ubergeeks can participate. The network is growing to simply become a place of well organized and quality blogs, places that don’t regurgitate the latest happenings/news. Its a place of original content. How can you blame Paul for coming up with money making ideas. Bill Gates had an idea, the owner of Dell had an idea, the owner of Cingular had an idea, etc… and that idea is to make a living off what you love to do. I would love to make my complete living off the internet, thats my goal, but for now, I get a small adsense paycheck every 2 months and I have a full time job at a web development company. So I think its important to escape this idea that 9rules.com is merely an elite network that anyone who joins sees gold and does it for money.
Back a couple months ago when Paul ran his first ‘24 hour entry time’, I entered my www.majorchampionships.com website with the ‘hope’ it might get looked at. Well, 2 months later, I get an email sayings its accepted. I was happier then hell. Sure, I have gotten traffic from 9 rules. In fact, it represents 10% of my referrals, but I am not rolling in dough nor am I crashing my server because of visitor hits. Sure, its difficult to get into the network now, but eventually, because of the wide array of sites that will eventually be accepted (like Mike said), it will be an overall great network of high quality blogs and original content. Whats wrong with that? And whats wrong with Paul wanting to make money off that concept. We live in a world where too many people bitch about wanting stuff for free. Well, time = money. If Paul puts 8 hours a day into his work, he should expect to be paid for it. Whats the problem?
I am happy I am in the network, but don’t think being in this network automatically means more money. It takes hard work and time to run a website (as you, the author, also know). - #9
- Matt Burris
- 1201 days ago
- As a member, I’d like to add some input. Most of the arguments would be valid points, however it’s moot when you’re not even required to put an ad on your site, just a 9rules image featuring the logo that helps keep stat tracking as well.
An example site that doesn’t have an ad, but is a part of the network is Erik’s excellent site at http://kartooner.com/ – he felt the ad would be out of place, and the 9rules team respected his wishes.
What 9rules essentially does is help bring traffic to our sites, and provide a place for us to gather and talk with one another, share ideas, whether it be about web design, how to improve our content, or learn something new.
I’ve been part of a network where money was the bottom-line, and let me tell you, the 9rules Network is nothing like the vanilla network. It’s a more relaxed, flexible, and social network that highlights content, and to some extent good designs.
Hopefully this clears up the misconception about the network, and the sites within it. - #10
- Garrett Dimon
- 1201 days ago
- Just my 2 cents, but when you have a problem with someone, it’s always better to talk to them in person first rather than try to call them out in a public forum.
In this case you might have been able to actually understand the motivation instead of presuming to understand. Naturally, forming and voicing opinions based on assumptions doesn’t do much for your argument. Especially if they are incorrect. - #11
- Matthew Pennell
- 1201 days ago
- Matthew, Mike, Bryan, Matt, Garrett – thanks for all your comments and first-hand opinion on the 9rules network; it’s great to have the opportunity for dialogue on the subject with those involved.
I’ll try to address all your points in turn (damn, wish I’d made this comments box a bit larger!)
Firstly, Garrett: my original post was in no way a “call out” aimed at Paul – if it was it would have been the first one in recorded history to have described its target as a “genius” and “far too smart”! It was just my musings on the intentions and implications of the network, nothing personal aimed at the guys who set it up.
For the record, I have no problem with making money either.
Mike (and someone else mentioned it, I think): I’ve never implied that it was some sort of club for the “best web designers”; I’m aware of the stated aim to highlight great content. However, your own personal take on it does raise another question – if the aim is to be the go-to place for weblogs on every subject under the sun, why not do it for free? I think the fact that authors have to effectively pay for the privilege to be a “proud member” of the network means that some will question their motives (who is going to pay without getting something back?)
Matt: See Kev’s points earlier with reference to the effect of directory listings and backlinks – a member site doesn’t have to carry adverts to affect the income profile of its network site, so they are not moot points at all.
Bryan: I’m not blaming Paul for coming up with the idea of setting up a network (although let’s be fair, it’s hardly an original one); if you read my article I was expressing concern for the effect that networks have on the value of content.
As I predicted, many of the members have come out in support of 9rules - and that is as it should be, I wouldn't have expected you all to have entered into the arrangement with anything less than honourable intentions - but what of the long-term implications?
You seem to want to take traffic away from other (non-member) sites by creating a one-stop shop for blogs. Why - because their content isn't good enough? But presumably if their content was good then they would be a 9rules member. And how is that not creating a "them and us" situation?
PS: Mike - all HTML is stripped out, but you can use Textile formatting. :) - #12
- Mike Rundle
- 1201 days ago
- “I think the fact that authors have to effectively pay for the privilege to be a “proud member” of the network means that some will question their motives (who is going to pay without getting something back?)”
Just to point this out, our members do not have to run advertisements on their site to be part of the network. That is 100% their choice, and it is not a pre-requisite. Some members are just interested in the community aspect of 9rules, and that’s perfectly fine to us.
As for doing it for free, I think if you actually quit your job and started doing a project like this full-time (like I did) you would realize that money is necessary for things like 1) paying my health insurance now that I’m doing 9rules full-time, 2) paying my rent now that I don’t have a steady income, and 3) paying for food. Should I do it for free full-time? Sure, you pay my bills.
To make 9rules what it needs to be in order to be successful, a full-time commitment to it was absolutely necessary. Editing content and going over submissions by hand takes time, designing the site takes time, coding the backend infrastructure to hold up to millions of pageviews each month takes time, and our time is worth money. I’m actually sick of people thinking that every single project/company/whatever on the planet should do stuff for free. Google makes money, Odeo makes money, Basecamp makes money, so why should a company like 9rules be any different? - #13
- Mike Rundle
- 1201 days ago
- “You seem to want to take traffic away from other (non-member) sites by creating a one-stop shop for blogs. Why – because their content isn’t good enough? But presumably if their content was good then they would be a 9rules member. And how is that not creating a “them and us” situation?”
Our goal is to find the best content on the web and make it easier to access for everyone. If we think a site’s content would benefit our readers and the 9rules community, then we’d love to have them on-board.
Poorly designed websites aren’t featured on Stylegala or Plastic Pilots, so isn’t that an “us and them” situation as well? Does it show an elitist view of the internet and web design in general? No, it just showcases best-of-breed designs just as 9rules showcases best-of-breed web content. I don’t see the problem with recognizing great content, and the best way I know of recognizing said content is to add them to 9rules because it puts them in front of a much larger audience than they normally would have access to. We link, promote, talk about, blog about, and help all of our network members (regardless of the ads they run or don’t run) just because we want to help them succeed.
9rules has boosted the traffic for all of our member sites (sometimes 50% or more, but that’s in rare cases) and our members are happy that more eyes are on their work. Our network members have a passion for the web, and we do our best to feature them in front of a larger audience. We’re constantly looking for more sites we’d like to add, because then it improves the quality of our network and the associated community. I truly don’t see the negative implications of this. - #14
- Mike Rundle
- 1201 days ago
- BTW: I used textile and it didn’t work to italicize stuff even though it showed up in the live preview.
- #15
- Matthew Pennell
- 1201 days ago
- Re: Textile – yeah, I know – I think it’s because you had the emphasis underscores wrapped around quotes; there are a few combinations of Textile formattings that screw up when applied together.
- #16
- Matthew Pennell
- 1201 days ago
- Mike: “Google makes money, Odeo makes money, Basecamp makes money, so why should a company like 9rules be any different?”
How do you rationalise the fact that you need to put food on the table and pay the bills, with the goal of “finding the best content on the web and making it easier to access for everyone”? What do you do when those two imperatives clash? Which wins out? Does the family go hungry because there are no great ad-carrying blogs to big-up this month?
Of course not. You do what you have to, so don’t pretend it is an entirely altruistic endeavour.
Anyway, we’re getting somewhat off the point. My complaint wasn’t that 9rules makes money for someone, but that it implicitly devalues everyone not in the club.
Got to go home and feed the kids now – talk amongst yourselves… :) - #17
- John Zeratsky
- 1201 days ago
- Your complaint that 9rules “implicitly devalues everyone not in the club” is short-sighted, I think. You were right on when you said (in your original post) that blogs are all about allowing communities to form. They form around links, comments, and private communications (email, IM).
9rules is no different—we came together based on our enthusiasm for blogging, our desire to get our work in front of more eyeballs, and our intention to take this medium seriously.
The result? A community. We link to each other, we talk to each other, we share ideas and help one another out. And contrary to your implications, we didn’t have to give anything up or buy in to anything as individual bloggers to become a part of this community.
Perhaps the best part is that while the community is essentially by invitation only (aren’t all communities, though?), we are in no way walled off from the rest of the web. Any benefits that we reap as members of 9rules will transfer to everyone that we, as individual bloggers, choose to link to or communicate with. - #18
- John Zeratsky
- 1201 days ago
- I should add that, for whatever it’s worth, I do not have ads on my site. This was a decision that I made independently and never felt any pressure from 9rules, et al about.
- #19
- Jonathan Snook
- 1201 days ago
- I think I understand the argument that Matthew is trying to make. By establishing a content network, it diminishes the ability of people not within the network to generate traffic.
Before, all users were on a somewhat level playing field. The distribution ratio in traffic was more evenly distributed between popular and unpopular sites (hopefully related to good and terrible content).
The network creates a concentration of traffic that takes away from those that might have been just below that cut off.
To demonstrate, let’s say we had 10 blogs in order of popularity:
9-8-7-6-5-4-3-2-1-0 [before]
9-9-9-4-4-3-3-2-1-0 [after]
Notice how there is a higher concentration of traffic at the top? the traffic is taken away from those in the middle who are just as deserving of the traffic.
This is all just hypothetical, of course. Ultimately, with the abundance of sites, there are just too many factors to confirm this theory.
For the record, I’m jealous I’m not in 9rules. ;) - #20
- Scrivs
- 1201 days ago
- Jonathan,
What you are missing in your analogy is the fact the when the top 3 blogs in the after example link to the rest of the sites on the list they are essentially providing them with double the traffic.
I think everyone involved in the discussion so far has done an excellent job of voicing their opinion so I still away for now. I think this might be better served with an entry of my own because I can tend to get a bit long winded :-) - #21
- Matthew Pennell
- 1201 days ago
- Just make sure you link this article so I can double my traffic, Scrivs… ;)
John: Just to state my position again, I am well aware that there are several blogs in the network that do not carry adverts, and also that 9rules do not force or otherwise coerce new members to carry advertising (apart from the 9rules linkback).
However, if you do carry ads, you are effectively paying to be in the club; and if you don’t have ads, you are still contributing to the traffic and Googlejuice accumulating for the main 9rules site and all the other member blogs (and as Jonathan illustrated, bleeding traffic from other deserving sites). In fact it could be argued that by not carrying ads, you are allowing others to profit from your hard work without gaining anything yourself (apart from perhaps increased traffic costs). That’s your choice, of course. - #22
- Matthew Pennell
- 1201 days ago
- PS: I’ve made the comment form area a bit bigger due to the recent essays posted on this entry. :)
- #23
- Jonathan Snook
- 1201 days ago
- Scrivs, how are those within the network finding content on anything below the network (based on my analogy)? Due to the additional weight at the top end, it’d make it more difficult to find quality content beyond that drop-off.
Anyways, we can discuss all the “what-if” scenarios we want… the internet is just too big for 9rules to generate THAT much content and garner THAT much search engine influence to really affect the overall popularity of sites.
And don’t misconstrue my original comment. I was simply trying to demonstrate the concept. :) - #24
- Matthew Pennell
- 1201 days ago
- Jon: Actually I think a collection of standards-based, semantically-coded sites with well-chosen page titles and headings (advice provided in the members-only 9rules forum, no doubt) can make a big impact on search engine rankings.
Look at how easy various Googlebomb campaigns have been – it only takes half-a-dozen links to put you at #1 for a certain phrase or word. - #25
- James Archer
- 1201 days ago
- I run three of the 9rules network sites, and it’s been a great experience for me so far. I certainly don’t agree with the notion that 9rules is a “clique” that’s depriving others.
Let’s go back, way back, back into time. Let’s say we’ve got a bunch of cavemen, each working hard to hunt and gather for his family.
A few cavemen realize that they can band together and get better hunting results as a team than they could individually.
Sure, there are going to be a few individual hunters who gripe that “those guys are getting more prey—that’s not fair!”
But that doesn’t stop collaboration from behing a fundamental institution of human society. It’s the reason we’re sitting here chatting about blogs instead of hiding in caves wondering where our next meal will come from.
To my mind, the argument that institutions such as the 9rules network are harming the level playing field are absolutely as silly as saying that we cavemen ought to hunt on our own because it’s more fair that way. Sure we don’t hurt any feelings, but we also hold back the significant progress (which ultimately benefits everyone) that comes from collaboration.
You seem to understand that nobody benefits from the “us vs. them” mentality, so I’m surprised that you’re promoting it with a post like this. From everything I’ve seen of the 9rules network, it’s based on a genuine desire to promote the efforts of personal publishers in general, not just its members. I (and most other members, from what I can tell) see it not as “us vs. them,” but rather “one giant us.” - #26
- Matthew Pennell
- 1201 days ago
- James: Surely a more accurate analogy would be that all the cavemen were getting on fine – some were better hunters than others, some were crap, but by and large everyone survived – until a few cavemen got the idea to corral all the animals into a convenient valley and let their buddies have their pick of them, as long as they gave the cavemen who’d had the idea the best bits of meat.
Unfortunately all the other cavemen died because there was no food left for them to hunt.
Are we still on the side of the entrepreneur cavemen? - #27
- Paolo
- 1201 days ago
- There will always be sites like dooce.com that become Net sensations on their own and others that need the support of larger groups to try and come close. While I think both ways are viable and fine, I’d rather be the lucky one who gains that kind of readership on my own merits.
Personally, I join communities for the networking and discussion, not for guidance on how to write my blog or what topics to talk about more than others. Moreover, the idea that I’d have to apply to be deemed worthy of what 9Rules wants to represent makes it more clear that 9Rules is looking to be a Net talent agency and their members are the celebrities.
If that’s accurate, it’s more than likely that the really great bloggers will be approached by networks like 9Rules and the mediocre ones will go knocking to get in.
Either way, good luck to everyone. Great discussion! - #28
- Justin Halsall
- 1201 days ago
- <comment deleted>
Ed: Spamming your own unfinished network site on other sites is not going to make you any friends. - #29
- James Archer
- 1201 days ago
- Matthew, I think that analogy is a bit over the top. I’m sure you don’t genuinely believe that 9rules is sucking up all blog traffic, and that all other blogs will inevitably fail for lack of readers. That would be silly. Nobody’s going to starve.
By spreading out his traffic among other sites, Scrivs is basically empowering those individual sites to do more with their presence. The folks I link to from my sites (which are overwhelmingly non-network-members) get more traffic from those links as a result of my membership in the network.
I now have a great ability to share the love, and I’m taking advantage of it. I’m not hording traffic for myself, I’m taking it and spreading it out to others—as are many other members of the network.
If the 9rules network, by presenting a collection of well-made and interesting content sites, can get some new folks interested in blogs, RSS, etc., then all of us—members and non-members alike—benefit from it. - #30
- Sumeet
- 1201 days ago
- “The folks I link to from my sites (which are overwhelmingly non-network-members) get more traffic from those links as a result of my membership in the network.”
I haven’t yet decided how I feel about this issue. I think it’s interesting, and possibly deeper than seems. My comment here is endorsment-free. In fact, it’s hardly a comment; it’s more of a question:
How do you find sites to link to? Is there a website you check regularly to see what non-member, obscure, personal sites are discussing something interesting? This is a question that’s been swimming around in my brain for a while. I always wonder where bloggers find their material – espcially if they’re among the first to link it. - #31
- Jacob Gower
- 1201 days ago
- I also find it hard to believe that 9Rules is sucking up traffic. As a nonmember I can say that all the network has really done is increase the sites I visit on a daily basis. The fact that some people are actually visiting more sites because of the network is only a good thing for everybody.
- #32
- Scott Kidder
- 1201 days ago
- “You seem to want to take traffic away from other (non-member) sites by creating a one-stop shop for blogs. Why – because their content isn’t good enough? But presumably if their content was good then they would be a 9rules member. And how is that not creating a “them and us” situation?”
Give me a break. I mean, really. Echoing and expanding on what Mike said above, everything isn’t free. Perhaps in a perfect world everyone with a website could go into a circle and sing kumbayah, but that isn’t practical. Obviously the other weblog networks are out there to, among other things, make enough money to pay those that contribute full-time fair market value for the fruits of their labors.
What’s wrong with an “us vs. them” situation, anyway? Mike didn’t say 9rules would have the best content and everyone else would suck and no one should EVER go to any other website for anything… that is just his vision for where they are taking things.
[Disclosure: I don’t work with 9rules, though I am friends with them. I do, however, work with Gawker Media.] - #33
- Matthew Pennell
- 1201 days ago
- James: Yes, of course my analogy was rather extreme – I certainly don’t think anyone is going to starve due to lack of traffic (well, Kottke maybe!)
But it is silly to say that if 9rules membership delivers much greater volumes of traffic, that there won’t be a corresponding drop in traffic elsewhere.
Jacob: “The fact that some people are actually visiting more sites because of the network is only a good thing for everybody.”
In the short term, perhaps. At the moment I would imagine that the bulk of 9rules audience is web-design related due to its birth within Scrivs’ empire, and we perhaps have the time (and inclination) to add more and more sites to our RSS feedreader and spend more time surfing.
But what about when Mike’s dream has come true and it is a handy resource for finding out about South American spelunking? Now how hard will it be for non-network spelunking blogs to make a dent in the market when the network members have the weight of hundreds of highly-ranked other sites all linking to each other?
Scott: “Mike didn’t say 9rules would have the best content and everyone else would suck and no one should EVER go to any other website for anything…”
But that is implicit in the declared aims of the network. Like you say, the network needs to make money to pay those doing it full-time – there is bound to come a point when it has to compromise on its ideals to put food on the table. - #35
- Jim Renaud
- 1196 days ago
- I don’t understand what is so bad about 9 rules?
I have about 25 sites in my “Daily Tabs” folder that I hit every morning and after lunch. Many of the links are to 9 rules member sites and I actually have 9 rules linked because once in a while one of their other contributors who aren’t in my daily routine have something interesting to say.
I don’t really find this to much different from let’s say Jason Kottke. He makes a living primarily by linking to other stuff. That’s not to take away from his original content and his witty takes on the links, but for the most part, blogs are the world through someone’s prism. I view 9 rules as a larger prism. Over time 9 rules will develop a collective voice in what they include and don’t.
I don’t think there is any us vs. them because 9 rules includes members who continue to link to non-member sites, who don’t want to stop you from putting as many other sites in your tab folder. - #36
- Johnny Lactose
- 1196 days ago
- It sounds to me like you’re trying to become google. I’ve gotten this from reading about half of the entries here, from least current to mid current. basically based solely on the entry referring to someone’s mother and gardening. “I want my mom to find tons of information about gardening without having to use google which is difficult to use.” so, you’re calling out google as being difficult for people to use (some people). fair enough.
you’re also implying that you’d like 9rules to be some kind of be all and end all for blog type content. detailing everything under the sun. trouble with this though, assuming 9rules grows and grows and grows, it’ll have a lot of content, tons of it. it will be absolutely retarded how much there will be. which i don’t think will help your mom. plus, at this point, being a content powerhouse, is she still going to be able to find what she wants to find easier than she could with google? as far as i’m concerned, it’ll be the same thing.
realistically, imagine the web today. what do you have? sales and opinions. put quite simply. in the end, if you’re looking for info, you’re going to be hitting a blog of some form, or you’re going to be hitting a library. but assume that blogs will soon dominate the web. 9rules will be the be all and end all of content finding (not just for gardening), and will represent an easier alternative to google.
no matter how i put this, and sorry if i’ve lost you, is it sounds a hell of a lot to me like you want to be google. we suspect this of being money driven. we hear intentions of being the place to go for this, for that…. sounds like you want to be the next big ipo.
who DOESN’T want to make money? could it be though, that the amount all y’all are shooting for could be quite a bit more than what we’re talking about here?
and i couldn’t find any info on the 9rules network about gardening, incidentally. - #37
- Kev
- 1196 days ago
- From my perspective, the most negative aspect is the ‘link farm/directory’ aspect.
Personally, its my opinion that creating a contrived community via a directory is verging on black hat SEO techniques. 9 rules doesn’t even have the fallback of being industry specific – this is open to abuse and could result in profiteering from Black Hat SEO techniques.
I’m not claiming it is being run like this but this interpretation is valid. - #38
- Haasim Mahanaim
- 1192 days ago
- This whole discussion seems like an argument for the sake of being cynical. I am seeing leaps in logic that sound very sensational without having much depth beyond that. 9Rules isn’t any different from content portals such as Metafilter, Fark and Slashdot or any network of bloggers linking to each other. I don’t see how 9Rules is any more of a clique than any other blogroll. And there seems to be this assumption that sites in the network are only feeding traffic amongst themselves, when in fact ‘clique’ members are free to link to sites outside of the network, obviously.
So what if someone decides to make money with their web site? So what if money (for better or worse) affects their content? Money can affect content in different ways. Every now and then I would come across a magazine that is filled entirely with ads that are disguised as content. Usually these shit-mags don’t last for very long and even if they did, I wouldn’t have to read them. But usually publications that make money are of a better quality than mags that only make some money or none at all. The reason is simple. If I have money I can go to the Toronto International Film festival and write in-depth coverage about the event. If I don’t have any money, all I can do is offer superficial commentary that is derivative of other people’s coverage. Money is not the death of independent media. PBS and NPR aren’t solely run by volunteers; instead these organizations pay a modest salary (like most non-profit organization) to their staff because time is money and people need money to live, which means most people can’t be asked to a volunteer a substantial amount of their time for free. And it requires a substantial amount of time to produce anything of a high standard of quality with any consistency. It’s the same thing with blogs. 9Rules is a good idea–though not entirely original. What is somewhat unique is their Google like, “Do No Evil” mentality. 9Rules is a neat idea that has been well implemented. So for the life of me, I can’t understand what is all this bitchin’ is about. - #39
- Robb Dunewood
- 1188 days ago
- I think that the name of this post, “Them and Us”, is very appropriate because it seems to me like there a many bloggers out there who feel anyone who tries to monetize their blogging efforts (Them), somehow cheapens the experience for everyone else (Us). It’s kind of like the starving artist vs. the graphic designer that works for the big marketing firm. Let me say that I don’t belong to 9rules Network, or any blogging network for that matter, but I do monetize my blogs so I guess that I am (Them).
I really don’t understand why so many have issues with people, Bloggerpreneurs if you will, that make money off of and / or from blogging. We admire anyone in any other industry that is able to take their hobby, their passion, and turn it into a business that affords them the lifestyle that they are accustomed to. Why should blogging be any different? - #40
Some numbers or some personal takes from those involved would be an interesting read.
Until then, I’d have to say I’m not convinced that they’re what they say they are, either.