5 ms·

This is definition of spam: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/spam https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/spam To the best of my knowledge this pa

This is definition of spam: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/spam https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/spam To the best of my knowledge this page was not sent to anyone.

SahAssar 3y ago
Spam in the context of SEO clearly means something more similar to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spamdexing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spamdexing or unhelpful/dishonest/unrelated content that is just there for ranking. Are you disputing that the FAQ page tries to rank your site higher by having autogenerated answers to questions your site is not authoritative on? Are any of the questions on the FAQ actually written or meant to be read by a human?
inhumantsar 3y ago
We all know that the definition has expanded in recent years to include low-effort or bot-generated content being flogged on social media (eg: one of Reddit's report options is "spam") and in search results. Either way, if you want to keep a positive image going, don't take internet comments personally. Just incorporate the feedback and make changes if you feel it's warranted.
Nevermark 3y ago
After being caught behaving badly, a debate about the proper terminology for your lapse in ethical judgment is not a winning move. It might suggest that your perspectives and priorities are still wonky. I would prioritize immediately and permanently removing the material and the practice, over posting questionable whataboutism arguments vs. spam.
- romange 3y ago
  1. We removed the FAQ page 2. You are right, I need to shut the fuck up and let self-righteous hn crowd with torches do what they do best - find a weakness, and push it until they get bored and switch to beat another builder. You asked me about my perspectives and priorities? These are my priorities: https://github.com/dragonflydb/dragonfly/graphs/contributors https://github.com/dragonflydb/dragonfly/graphs/contributors 3. The first thing I did was on this thread was to apologize for having FAQ with such content.
  - SahAssar 3y ago
    The best thing about showing anything to others is seeing things about it that you didn't see before. That can be flaws or a hidden gem, but either way you know more about what you have than you did before. You might feel that the focus on the FAQ page was irrelevant and irritating but it gave you feedback on something that at least a few people found relevant about your marketing. Even if you feel like it was just "find a weakness, and push it" I still hope you understand that you got something out of it and hopefully feel OK with that.
    - romange 3y ago
      Absolutely. And I am sorry I reacted this way.
Veen 3y ago
That's not Google's definition of search spam, as I suspect you will soon find out.

This is definition of spam: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/spam https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/spam To the best of my knowledge this page was not sent to anyone.

SahAssar 3y ago

Spam in the context of SEO clearly means something more similar to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spamdexing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spamdexing or unhelpful/dishonest/unrelated content that is just there for ranking. Are you disputing that the FAQ page tries to rank your site higher by having autogenerated answers to questions your site is not authoritative on? Are any of the questions on the FAQ actually written or meant to be read by a human?

inhumantsar 3y ago

We all know that the definition has expanded in recent years to include low-effort or bot-generated content being flogged on social media (eg: one of Reddit's report options is "spam") and in search results. Either way, if you want to keep a positive image going, don't take internet comments personally. Just incorporate the feedback and make changes if you feel it's warranted.

Nevermark 3y ago

After being caught behaving badly, a debate about the proper terminology for your lapse in ethical judgment is not a winning move. It might suggest that your perspectives and priorities are still wonky. I would prioritize immediately and permanently removing the material and the practice, over posting questionable whataboutism arguments vs. spam.

romange 3y ago
1. We removed the FAQ page 2. You are right, I need to shut the fuck up and let self-righteous hn crowd with torches do what they do best - find a weakness, and push it until they get bored and switch to beat another builder. You asked me about my perspectives and priorities? These are my priorities: https://github.com/dragonflydb/dragonfly/graphs/contributors https://github.com/dragonflydb/dragonfly/graphs/contributors 3. The first thing I did was on this thread was to apologize for having FAQ with such content.
- SahAssar 3y ago
  The best thing about showing anything to others is seeing things about it that you didn't see before. That can be flaws or a hidden gem, but either way you know more about what you have than you did before. You might feel that the focus on the FAQ page was irrelevant and irritating but it gave you feedback on something that at least a few people found relevant about your marketing. Even if you feel like it was just "find a weakness, and push it" I still hope you understand that you got something out of it and hopefully feel OK with that.
  - romange 3y ago
    Absolutely. And I am sorry I reacted this way.

Veen 3y ago

That's not Google's definition of search spam, as I suspect you will soon find out.