>Will they stay there for more than a few months? No. They will be squashed out, and legitimate players will over time win out.
This isn't true at all in my experience. As a quick test I tried searching for "best cordless iron", on the first page there is an article from 2018 that leads to a very broken page with filler content and affiliate links. [1] There are a couple of other articles with basically the exact same content rewritten in various ways also on the first page.
A quick SERP history check confirms that this page has returned in the top 10 results for various keywords since late 2018.
>It's easy to speculate and make logical statements, but they don't hold much weight without first-hand experience and observation.
This statement is a bit ironic given that it took me 1 keyword and 5 seconds of digging to find this one example.
You should update the Blizzard entry. Blizzard didn't just ban the player, they rescinded his prize money and fired the 2 casters that were with him on air.
Says who? Plenty of my side projects have made me quite a bit of money.
I'd say your mindset is equally as unhealthy as you'd never put any serious thought into it, making your statement about them not making money a self-fulfilling prophecy.
Probably because Google is treating all s3.amazonaws.com links as being the same authoritative site, so they see each of these coupon sites as just a page of s3.amazonaws.com and therefore the site gets the link 'juice' from the root s3.aws domain.
Each page of a site doesn't need a ton of links to that specific page to rank, just links to the site in general (site being root link plus subdomains).
That's typically why blogspot-type services give you a subdomain, and not a page on their main domain.
It's been known about in SEO circles for a while[0], will be interesting to see if things change in the next major Google update.
I think we have very different definitions of control.
To me, having control over when I leave is being able to walk out of the building at any time. Full autonomy. Having to petition some entity is the antithesis of control from my point of view.
My comment implied no such thing. I was simply stating that you can't just up and leave should you so wish, you getting released is not in your control.
> If you have admitted yourself into a psychiatric hospital, you can not simply sign yourself out and leave when you decide to do so. There is a process which must be followed in order to leave.
Personally I'd avoid them at all costs due to the loss of control. You can't just decide "I'm done" or "I don't like it here", you getting released is at the discretion of people that you don't even know.
One could argue that if the creators didn't want a constant discussion around the name every time they tried to promote it, they would have chosen a better name.
I don't think we should be censoring a discussion just because you've already had that particular discussion.
Can you elaborate on this? Is it just because of the inconsistency in revenue or is there some technical challenge I haven't considered?
I'm currently developing a usage-based API SaaS as a solo developer so this in particular really piqued my curiosity.