Ads
Some days ago I read a blog post about Netscape.com being better than Digg. After reading it I finally decided to try Netscape. First I submitted a story about my aversion against Digg and why I want to use Netscape from now on. On a side note: I did not choose Reddit because my eyes hurt looking at it.
After 2 hours or so, I noticed that nobody voted for my article. So I thought Netscape users like Digg users also dislike SEO. That’s why I started submitting very interesting articles from reknown sources and for different topics like I do with other social media sites (in Germany I am a social news power user).
After almost a day nobody voted for any of those stories.
Even today not a single vote has been cast for my 5 stories although I mentioned that on Sphinn and linked my profile and stories there.
So all in all, either Netscape does not work for new users or the votes are faked in some way. After several days I got only one visitor from Netscape.com
I disliked Digg for disregarding newbies but Netscape.com is even worse. You won’t reach anybody probably.
So do not waste your time with submitting to Netscape. You will be ignored or not noticed in the first place. Do not tell me that it’s my own fault. I know how social news sites work. Sites that do work send at least some users to your site. Sphinn for instance got me 10 visitors yesterday for my link bait article, but the headline was too negative I guess so they did not vote for it. Anyways, Sphinn works, Netscape does not.
This thing has 7 Comments
These sites do work, as long as you adapt to the way you need to , in order to make them work for you . That is what web 2.0 is about, users change the internet , if you snooze you loose .
I did not talk about “these sites”. I know perfectly well how social news sites work. Those who have a community at least make some people check your articles. On Netscape.com 5 articles were completely ignored. Some of those were frontpage news elsewhere, on sites that seemingly have much less traffic.
I really don’t dig (pun intended) your problem - if you’re that experienced in working social networks, shouldn’t it be a given that it’s just another case of “give before you take”?
We’ve tested Netscape a bit in the past 6 weeks or so with pretty good results considering. Of course, we don’t simply submit a story and wait for the votes to come. First, vote for plenty of others, add them as friends and then promote your own stuff.
Not everyone will reciprocate the favor but very many will. If someone’s positively and persistently not interested in your stuff while blithely gobbling your votes, you can always drop them and move on.
fantomaster, thank you for your comment. Of course you can argue that I should give a lot first before receiving anything back. It’s nonetheless very different compared to most other social news sites. A story always gets some votes on social news sites that have enough active visitors. Someone at Digg even submitted my Digg-article and it got 21 votes although it was rather concise.
If Netsacpe is just about vote swap it fails in my eyes. In this light Digg, which has many disadvantages, is nevertheless the winner of those two.
from netscape.com you can get high-PR link (even PR6)!
Yes, I fully agree with you. Netscape.com not give visitors to site. And it is very strange.
a gree to sergey - netscape not give visitors…
This thing has 2 Trackbacks
[…] a week ago I complained about Netscape.com not working out for me in any way almost everybody ignored me. Those that […]
[…] submissions from different sources to Netscape.com failed miserably to make the front […]