Forum Moderators: martinibuster
For this day (17 May), does it mean that they will pay for April 1-30 earnings, or for May (1-18) also?
as a layman I believe that one deserves a "trial" and that a "fair trial" is one that looks at YOU not a huge bundling up of suspects based on new arbitrary arbitrage (excuse pun) interpretations and a canned cold message.
Google isn't a court of law, and the question isn't guilt or innocence: It's whether Google wants to continue doing business with publishers whose business models aren't compatible with Google's own objectives. The AdSense agreement lets either party quit at any time, so Google isn't doing anything "evil"; it's just exercising its right to terminate the agreement, as more than a few publishers have done.
I don't think it's accurate to describe that kind of parting as having to do with protecting their long term interests, especially in light of their history of tolerating those sites for so long. As someone else mentioned in this thread, it likely has very much to do with the rumoured rollout in AdWords to allow advertisers to see where their clicks are coming from, and the impact it may have on advertiser perception on the quality of the content network.
I wonder if this would have happened sooner, if Yahoo, etc., had their act together.
I would consider advertiser perception to be in their long-term interest, but you make a good point - if an advertiser sees that their clicks are coming from crummy MFA sites versus authoritative content-driven sites, then confidence in AW would be shaken.
You wouldn't want to waste your advertising budget on people who arrived at your site from such sites - you'd prefer them to arrive from authoritative sites (lots of reviews, in-depth information, etc.), because those types are much more likely to buy your product.
Makes me wonder about changes with parked domains and single-page sites..
To those waiting for the full MFA story, buy the eBook, it must be on discount nowadays.
Avo19,
If you're looking for applause, you're in the wrong place.
Far from it. Anyway, I'll leave you all to your verbal meanderings. I've said my piece, I've nothing more to add.
cheers
But Google is not a normal company and does not want to be taken as such. No other company I know of wants stakeholders to hold it to such a high standard as "Don't be evil." That's not a normal company.
This is also why we accept Google becoming a de facto monopoly, because it's held to a higher standard.
If Google is to behave like just any other normal company I say it has become to large, to strong already.
I for one am intimidated.
You have to go back to European Nobility to find Googles equal.
Noblesse Oblige!
I'd say if their letter to you stated that their objection is to the business model, then you must stand a chance if you can show them you can adapt to their idea of an acceptable business model.
Good luck
Just a thought.
Ok, so I am preparing my response to the AdSense team about this.
The more I read, the less I think this is about me and my sites and more about a huge general June 1. crackdown.
I was coming to the opposite conclusion, to some extent.
Hey Everyone! I have an idea. Let's drive everyone off who might be able to provide some insight as to why their account is being disabled. Obviously, it must be because Google has decided they're unethical. Since they're obviously bad people and there are definitely no metrics involved, it could never happen to you.
Ya know... I pay a lot of taxes, probably more than I have to every year. I'm still always interested to hear why people believe they're being audited. My accountant says everything is fine. It could still happen to me. He also pays attention to the reasons why people get audited, and I expect him to do so. He doesn't tell me that they must have been bad people, and I have nothing to worry about because he thinks I'm a good person.
He also pays attention to the reasons why people get audited, and I expect him to do so. He doesn't tell me that they must have been bad people...
Doesn't that depend on what was found in the audits? :-)
Hey Everyone! I have an idea. Let's drive everyone off who might be able to provide some insight as to why their account is being disabled...
While I agree that ARB and MFA bashing is getting a bit old, a lot of us don't require extra insight into something we already know is risky.
I'm still always interested to hear why people believe they're being audited.
Most people who push the limits do so because they desire a certain outcome. Meaning, the folks who were doing ARB knew it and did it for their own benefit. I'm not condemning them, but they had to know that Google would eventually stop that gravy train.
You'd be hard pressed to find anyone who participated in ARB and didn't know they were.
