Take The High Road, Treat Others With Respect
By Sheila on Feb 11, 2010 in Blogging Tips
“With the rampant proliferation of user-generated content, the opportunity for disgruntled malcontents to damage your firm’s reputation increases everyday. Make sure to evaluate the extent of the problem, consider legal options, and stay within your comfort zone. Take the high road whenever possible, treat your opponent with respect” -Marty Weintraub
Yesterday an Entrecard blogger discovered that some members are cheating when they drop ECs, using a script that just shows the drop box, not the blogs. Instead of researching this finding to make sure that there is no other possible explanation for these drops to show up -this blogger posted defamatory comments, calling these bloggers cheats and scammers. It didn’t take long for other bloggers to join in, saying they would be sure to not visit those blogs anymore. Some of these bloggers have proven that his findings are not totally accurate. If I were one of these bloggers, I would be FURIOUS. These accusations will follow the bloggers forever. Something like this should have been turned over to EC – let them figure out who is cheating. I don’ t understand why anyone would post negative statements when they obviously have done a shoddy job gathering facts. I’m angry for these bloggers – I’d say half of them drop and comment on my blogs often. The person who wrote the post seems to jump to conclusions often and accuse people of cheating before he has all the facts. I remember when he had some ad service connected to his blog that redirected you to another page – one time when I was dropping on his blog the page redirected to some porn site (this was not a virus – but something he was doing to earn money) . What if I followed the same practice as this blogger and posted a long negative blog entry, connecting his name forever to to this nasty ad scheme. He didn’t realize that porn was showing up and removed the code when I sent him a message, but it seems like maybe I shouldn’t have said anything to him at all and instead just blast him with accusations.
This is not the first time that he has made accusations like this. Back in January he accused some CMF members of being Ghost-droppers (I was one of them). Through research Turnip and Ben where able to figure out why these numbers where showing up and came to the conclusion that there were definitely no scammers/ghostdroppers.
Comment -
“The Spikes Ghost Dropper!
Here are my Ghost Droppers…. My official Spikes ended on 31st
December there i got 15 clicks of 10 available (already 5 clicks more).
Now i get since 1st January 2 – 5 visits from the same persons (mainly
Norfolk and four from San Angelo).
Other members told me similar findings. Seems someone wants to game
the system??”
Response -
There are no “ghost droppers” on our end. We prevent users from being
credited for clicking a spike more than once, even accidentally”
Furthermore, we have security in place to prevent someone from creating
multiple CMF Ads accounts and then visiting your blog from each login.
Note that “Credit for clicking a Spike” and “visiting via the Spike URL” are
not the same thing. If a person doesn’t refresh their page, it is possible to
click the link twice, but the buyer won’t be charged, and the person clicking
won’t receive credit. Seems like a fuss over nothing. 44 unexplained visits
over a period of 10 days. But I will look at the stats for that time period and
see if I can find anything unusual on either end just to follow up.
“Shelia, Ben and I also appeared on one of those lists. I assure you I am
also not gaming anything.
Here are a few comments left in my message box:
“Here’s what I wrote to him (and I’m prepared to take legal action against him if he doesn’t do a good job of retracting his statements):
I’m very mad!!!
I went to the extra effort of Googling your blog and opening it from Google’s cache, because I didn’t see your widget.
I then clicked on your widget from the cached page. I do that for any blog I regularly visit if the site is down or I can’t find the widget.
And this is what I get in return!!!
I expect a public apology.. VERY public!”
“I’m prepared to file a libel complaint with Google and request that they take action, so that I don’t have to resort to legal measures.
I wonder how much damage has been done and how this will hurt my EC reputation.”
___________________________________________________________________________
“As far as I know this is down to using a browser cache, hence the reams of major EC members being accused. To be honest I and XXXX are sick of dropping, we’ve spent months doing it now. So we’re off, no time for this unfounded slander. There’s even a comment at XXXXXX saying the same thing, perhaps someone does have a piece of software but it certainly isn’t us! We can’t even afford to get the roof fixed. If a site is sluggish many users will use a cached version of the site, most Macs have this as standard in Safari. If a widget doesn’t load usually it is because the server is slow…I think XXXXXXXX will regret his actions, he should have asked some of those he has accused to explain first.”
So what do you do when someone defames you online?
- Evaluate the authority of the page on which the negative content is published. As with any SEO assignment, start by taking a look at PageRank and inbound links profile using Yahoo Site Explorer and other tools. If the offending result is not on a site’s homepage, then take a careful look at older and similar interior pages along with their archives.Google’s algorithmic regard for any page tends to accumulate over time as a result of numerous factors, known and “black box.” Therefore it’s a good idea to keep in mind that any page’s clout might increase over time. Be advised and plan accordingly.Reciprocally if the problem content is currently indexing on a blog’s homepage, the difficulty may be mitigated when the post cycles off the homepage into archives. While the post is on the homepage, its content has the full “weight” of the homepage’s authority.This won’t be the case in archive unless the post generates great links. That said many blogs’ category pages, author and date archives accumulate PageRank and you might have to wait a while for the post to cycle even deeper into to site over time. (Note: PageRank isn’t everything but it’s better to have it than not.)
- Since some offending results violate copyright or trademark laws, a strong understanding of and willingness to utilize legal channels can be important arrows in the SEO sharpshooter’s quiver. Sometimes the first salvo we fire is from our client’s law firm in the form of a cease and desist letter.Be aware of laws as pertain to protected marks and intellectual property. Certainly taking the legal route can yield results and sometimes the expense makes sense. Our legal team has scared many an idiot off our client’s back. Some rouges just don’t want to mess with lawyers and can be “encouraged” to take down their problem content.On the other hand be a realist. Some insolent jerk halfway around the world won’t give a rat’s ass about your attorney’s saber rattling. Sometimes firing legal missals can even result in your opponent digging in their heals with an intransigent disregard for reality.When nasty search engine results stem from social media channels, it can be impossible to locate the villain let alone engage them legally. Social site moderators often couldn’t care less because they thrive on the passionate engagement which surrounds controversy. StumbleUpon (eBay) is the worst as they are nearly completely unwilling to enforce Terms of Services as pertain to abusive “troll” users.
- Determine the likelihood that the substance of proposed defensive content will further provoke and backfire virally. We find it’s best if newly created content and subsequent promotional activity do not appear to be directly related to the problem we’re competing with.My grandmother used to tell me never to “get into a pissing contest with a skunk. Even if you win…you stink. “Instead, create defensive content that builds on strengths of your business to contradict the negatives raised by a bad editorial. Build your content to outrank the perpetrator’s.Though we never take directly refuting offensive results off the table fully, one needs to be extremely careful. We don’t want 5 other bloggers to rally behind their jerky friend and take up a damaging cause they hadn’t even noticed before.
- Unless you’re an expert, talk to a professional before engaging directly in social channels surrounding the problem results. I can’t tell you how many times we’ve seen a business person, who has no experience in social media, climb into a comments thread and make things SO much worse. There are very few instances when taking a step back and counting to 10 will negatively impact the end result of defensive activities.If you’re not a regular contributer in a specific social media channel, learning the vernacular while under duress is not the best choice. Also we’ve seen clients make legal mistakes publicly which made a difficult problem much worse. Call an SEO/social media expert. Call your lawyer. Have a glass of wine and some sushi. Chill.
- If direct engagement in social channels makes sense, attempt to earn the provocateurs respect by your response. Every disaster is an opportunity in the making and vice versa. Whilst measured righteous indignation can be a powerful tool, start with classic high road messages of respect and understanding: “I understand your position,” “respect your right to express your feelings in public,” “am grateful for the opportunity to engage in a dialog” and “what can we do to make things right?”
- Take the high road over and over. Then take the high road again. If that doesn’t work…you can always nuke em’. There are white hat methods and other, ummmm, not-white hat methods available to “eliminate” the problem. Given recent furor over public discussion of non-candy-ass SEO tactics you’ll have to contact me directly to discuss the options further.
- Consider paid search as a stopgap and/or ongoing strategy. When weighing the cost of PPC to circumvent damaging organic results, paid search is often an attractive “lesser of all evils’ option, especially in the short term while waiting for other solutions to come online. Google’s content network, in the hands of a site-targeting expert, can be a highly effective channel-especially when clarifying or refuting mainstream damage in news, niche’ and social channels.
- Get back to SEO basics. The best defense is a good offense. In reality it should be difficult for idiots to crack into direct brand search results if your website is optimized properly.One of our newer clients came to us under assault from a disgruntled former customer. It didn’t make sense at first because the offensive result was on a PR zero site with little authority.Upon evaluation we quickly ascertained that our client’s website was entirely a Flash movie, literally with no deep indexing. Solving the “crises” was as simple as re-publishing the site in HTML with Flash elements instead of a full Flash movie.
No related posts.
33 Comment(s)
By Michael Terrence on Feb 11, 2010 | Reply
A very fair and intelligent way of looking at the issue. My blog isn’t on that blogger’s list but I might as well be. Blogs I have high respect for had their reputation, which they had painstaking built, tarnished all because one blogger decided to take the “tabloid sensationalism” route in resolving what he saw was a problem. What is worst as you have already mentioned, many of us stood on the side and cheered. What a shame!
By Jen on Feb 11, 2010 | Reply
After this I am pretty sure I am going to quit Entrecard. There are so many reason beyond this (and I realize this is not their fault) but for me it is time to move on. It was great in the beginning when I didn’t know anyone out here but most of the blogs I drop on now I don’t read and they don’t read me. The ones I do read, and do comment on, I will continue to do so because I enjoy their blog, not because I have to drop on them. Several of my friends were accused of cheating today. My inbox was full of emails from people pointing this ‘story’ out to me because I advertise on these people’s sites and they on mine. The people he accused of “cheating” are very worried about their online reputations. They need to consider the source but the damage was done very publicly. Talk about shoot now and ask questions later. Basically I don’t want to visit sites that are authored by someone as petty as this one, and I want to visit blogs I enjoy not tattle tale blogs.
Wow, I really rambled on that time didn’t I?
By Beth Charette on Feb 12, 2010 | Reply
Let’s all take a step back, and realize that we are dealing with a human community.
In order for a human community to survive, both the good and bad must be handled with a degree of maturity.
No good comes of simply abandoning the unit when it fails on its mission. We must pull together and use the situation as a learning experience.
I for one am not quitting. I am simply hoping that those who are responsible will understand that they made a mistake, and not repeat it.
And, those of us who remain, perhaps we can serve as the structure needed to maintain a positive community.
Beth
ToysPeriod is a leading online shop specializing in lego sets and model railroad equipment.
By Susan on Feb 12, 2010 | Reply
I am sure that for some blogs that negative attention is still attention. In the quest to generate traffic numbers some people confuse the difference between traffic and good traffic.
By John@Family, Fitness and Finances on Feb 12, 2010 | Reply
A very well thought out post Sheila. I am one of those who momentarily stood on the sidelines and cheered at what I had briefly interpreted as justice being served on cheats. Almost immediately, I regretted submitting my comment on his blog, as I noticed Aldon’s response that was submitted about the same time as mine. There’s nothing I can do to take it back, but I did post an apology last night. I am truly sorry and wish I had not mixed myself up in this latest Entrecard saga. Reputations are hard to build, but easy to destroy. As Beth stated, I hope we can all use this as a learning experience.
By Jen on Feb 12, 2010 | Reply
The reason I am quitting Entrecard is not because it is a bad service or because of the actions of the individual who outed the bloggers or the bloggers who did this, and some have fessed up. The reason I want to leave is that the traffic from EC is no longer beneficial to my blog. My bounce rate is high, very high, because people stop by long enough to find my widget and leave. They don’t read what I have to say. I have found some wonderful blog through entrecard and have established relationships with them and will continue to visit them because I like them. Entrecard has served it’s purpose for my main blog. I may continue to use if for my other blogs but at this point I see it as a hindrance. I want people to come to my blog because they enjoy reading what I write, not because they have to.
By John on Feb 12, 2010 | Reply
I had an email response from Entrecard a few days ago after running a similar test on my blog at the beginning of the month.
They assured me the problem would be fixed then this whole situation blew up
I’m sorry to see some of my favourite bloggers have been caught up in the accusations.
By Harriet on Feb 12, 2010 | Reply
Wonderful post- you are the Master, and my hero
I am sickened that after numerous people reported this guy for his malicious and slanderous post, entrecard proceeded to pat him on the back in their blog- and then turn off the comments. Shame on entrecard!
Many of the innocent people listed in this ‘hiteresc’ witch hunt have taken down their widgets in protest. I may be soon to follow.
As you have stated, why would anyone take this unscientific mishmash seriously especially, taken this individual’s past?
Shame on entrecard! Kudos to you!
By Harriet on Feb 12, 2010 | Reply
- that was ‘hitleresc’…
By JT Locke on Feb 12, 2010 | Reply
Excellent post! Knowing how I felt when he made the accusation against me in CMFAds, I was the one from San Angelo, I know how those that were listed in this little “outing” feel. The anger that I feel for this little “twit” came boiling back up when I read his so-called “outing”.
He’s still over in the CMFAds forum gloating over the fact that no matter what these people say they are cheaters.
By turnip on Feb 12, 2010 | Reply
Some of the scripters have come clean and admitted using the quick drop pages. Other’s have come up with some pretty amusing tales how this may have happened. Reminds me of steroid use in baseball. But why not allow the test to have continued 3 or 4 days to be absolutely sure?
When the issues you quoted from the CMF Forum regarding Spikes arose, we examined all the data. It turned out to be a fuss over nothing, just a matter of the accuser not understanding how Google analytics cookies worked. What was not known to the public was that we did find two people trying to take advantage the system. Their loophole was immediately plugged after 2 days.
I’ve been on both sides of the fence when it comes to internet attacks. If you are the attacker, make sure what you say is true. Document emails,posts, and the TOS of sites in question. Don’t be afraid to get your own lawyer. In my case I had been selling products, paying for shipping, and storing my funds in “credits”. When a certain network stole everything in my account, I documented that as well.
Anyone can sue anyone over anything in the US. If my bank stole the funds in my account for calling their president an “asshat” on twitter, you can bet there would be legal action. But when a network takes my virtual funds because they lack virtual integrity, there are other methods of recourse. Sometimes writing about it is more fun.
By MountainWoman on Feb 12, 2010 | Reply
Thank you for this article. Some of the blogs mentioned in the “outing” are among my favorites. Phantom dropping or whatever to me is not the issue. It’s quality content that brings readers back time and again. That’s why I love your blog too.
By Jamie on Feb 12, 2010 | Reply
I think I found the blogger you’re talking about. I once called him out–very nicely–on my infowaif blog about his porn redirection on one of his sites. He. Threw. A. Fit. When I wouldn’t take down his user name (not his real name, his online nickname), he complained to my hosts. For a week. He tried to log into my blog with my BIRTHDAY that he got from my facebook page (the IPs matched. No confession, so it could have been his cat). Finally I changed the entry to “a blogger”. Haven’t heard a peep out of him since, but it’s funny that he feels he can do it, but no one can do it to her.
By RE - Entrepod on Feb 13, 2010 | Reply
Sheila, you have given me a totally new thought. this week maybe I will change my remaining ec blog into a crime log. maybe the name should be entrecrime. maybe I should run some backside accumulation on martin and post that data. maybe I should have posted his name and the info on his clicktrojans instead of being a good egg and sending it to entrecard who never responded to any of it ever ?
so many maybes’ and no real solutions except to be a smart blogger and get my ducks in a row. if it’s time to step away from ec, then away I shall go. two of my blogs are leaving this weekend. the third may go soon.
there isn’t enough traffic and comments from ec droppers to validly allow that trojan baiter to continue to steal my real estate and devalue my blogging. Recycled Frockery is a quality blog and to compare it with that corneycrap is in essence the best wake up call.
Heyyyy Thanks Girlfriend – I always feel better when we talk. (wink*wink) guess it’s the sushi and wine.
Howdy Everybody else and Happy Valentines Day
By Eli @ Business Sphere on Feb 13, 2010 | Reply
When I read Cornyman’s post, I commented that the best thing is to report to Entrecard, and I did e-mail Cindy on the serious allegation.
I then said that if the allegation is true, then there’s no use dropping cards anymore because all the traffic would be crap and non-existent, being ghost drops.
I preface my statement with “IF” because the allegation is still that– allegation and every blogger named on Cornyman’s blog post is or should be presumed innocent until proven otherwise — that is, until Entrecard has come out with a thorough findings based on its investigation.
As it is, Entrecard officially announced that the problem was that some users had not cleared their cache and were able to access Cornyman’s blog though the widget had been removed, while at the same time fixing the problem of a ghost dropper script.
By solomonsydelle on Feb 13, 2010 | Reply
Excellent post. This whole drama has left a very sour taste in my mouth, personally. There is no reason to attack each other. One thing about EC that I have appreciated is that members have always been kind to me, informing me of ways to improve my site and how to stay out of trouble. It is sad that one person’s accusation could have such a cascading effect and that so many rushed so quickly to take sides instead of just waiting a little longer.
Anyway, I have definitely learned from this situation.
@ Ausetkmt: Please don’t leave EC babe. You know I need your blogs!
By New York's HOTTEST Blog on Feb 13, 2010 | Reply
I use a “web accelerator” which heavily caches. I’m on dialup. I made Cornyman’s list. Sometimes my icon appears in the MyBlogLog or Twitter gadgets,other times it does not. There’s also that widget that tells where your visitor is coming from. Sometimes I show up on those and sometimes not. What I really don’t get is how some blogs have a paid entrecard ad on another blog, but when you click on “drop” it changes to “invalid” or “no such user.” What’s happening there?
By JuneZach (Fledgling Blogger) on Feb 13, 2010 | Reply
I reacted when I read the controversial post. I actually sent a message to some of the accused droppers to ask them personally about the issue. As I mentioned in my own post (http://junezach.khrye.com/?p=2452), “I do not want to lose the good dropping relationship with them.” Sad to say, some of them already left because of this. I hope they will be coming back soon. Thank you for this great post. It enlightened everyone’s minds!
By An on Feb 13, 2010 | Reply
Nice post.
He accused blogs of our dutch autism advocates, but not the main blog. Which is strange, because it used the same system of dropping. (which is not the button system he mentioned)
I only found out he mentioned our blog too, because someone mailed me.
Well, he’s got a lot of extra visitors and comments, plenty of linkylove.
When people want to follow him..well that says something about them, but not about my blog.
I like making my rounds at entrecard, I almost never comment after people told me my english is crap.
Our blog is just for those who want to use some tips, mainly very young people living at their first independent place. When we truly wanted to work to get more visitors we would have done something else than entrecard and adgitize. They almost never comment.
Thanks for your post.
I feel there’s no way you can defend yourself against people like that.
But I find myself dropping from the inbox instead of a list of links I saved to make dropping easy. So it has had influence. Bah!
By Lainy on Feb 13, 2010 | Reply
Hi Sheila!
I applaud you for coming up with this post. It certainly hit home.
I would feel the same way as you do if I were on the same shoe of the accused. They were obviously convicted without fair trial. And that’s so unfair. Feeling so furious would be an understatement!
How disappointing it is to see quite a handful of bloggers who jumped on the bandwagon. They have said so many things against these innocent people stirred by Martin’s post. I feel for the alleged scammers.
But the truth will always prevail.
As bloggers, we all are responsible for our acts. And yes, you’re right. We should treat each one with respect. As the old cliche goes: RESPECT BEGETS RESPECT.
WE must all learn from this whole “ghost dropper” brouhaha.
By Leomar on Feb 13, 2010 | Reply
Thanks for this excellent post and for the tips Sheila. I learned a lot from this “ghost dropper” brouhaha. One of my blogs was on the list… I have not yet reached a decision if I will leave Entrecard because of this. I guess it will depend on how Entrecard will deal with this situation.
By Apollo on Feb 14, 2010 | Reply
Nice post Sheila. When I received a message through EC and was made aware of the ‘Wall of Shame’ I thought it was great that members look out for cheaters and caught them. I glanced through the post and even left a comment. When I took a closer look at all the members identified, I started to disagree as I have interacted with some of the members, others left comments etc. which made aware that the list was useless besides the fact that many (hopefully) have learned a valuable lesson.
Initially I thought I would not drop on the those blogs anymore, but after giving it a second thought I never stopped my dropping habit.
I think EC has been filled with great members, plenty of which I interact and enjoy to read their blogs. I am sure there are some cheaters out there, but I think the matter was mishandled. I have learned my lesson not to jump on the bandwagon and I am glad it only took me 30 min and that I have not altered my habits.
It is sad that some good members were dragged through dirt when they have done nothing wrong. I don’t know what Cornyman intends to do, or what EC intends to do about this misstep. I am angered for the good bloggers who had suffered as a result of this ghost hunt.
I would think that Cornyman received a lot of traffic and backlinks for his experiment but hope that those were not his intensions. The basic idea to point out the problem of cheaters was good, but the execution was more than just a disaster.
By Laura on Feb 14, 2010 | Reply
Shelia , Happy Valentines’ Day.
The nerve of some people. Its sad that he made such accusations, I for one will not visit his blogs any longer. An excellent post and useful tips. Your internet reputation as a blogger and business needs to be protected just as much as your personal credit report… Entrecard is a good tool. There are so many wonderful bloggers that are always willing to help out and share information. Who knew there was a “wall of Shame”….. Kudos to you Shelia!
By Paul Baines on Feb 14, 2010 | Reply
Sheila, thanks so much for writing this post, it’s relief to see some people at Entrecard haven’t blindly jumped on the slander bandwagon. I and my partner have spent years visiting, dropping and commenting on others’ blogs and then this happens. I’m not prepared to further ruin the reputation of my more established blogs for the sake of a few visitors, so instead I am trying out a few newer blogs at EC and see how things work out. I have had a personal apology from Corneyman, but it doesn’t make up for the damage done. It still grates me, but as you say, all you can do is take the high road, which is, for all intensive purposes what I and my partner have done. We are, to put it bluntly, devastated by the actions of Corneyman. Indeed if I thought on his level I’d be calling for all of his blogs to be cancelled at Entrecard for such reckless behaviour. However, I don’t, and never will. I’d rather continue to believe that people are essentially good, somewhere deep down, they try and get on in life, and wherever possible, lend a helping hand to those worse off than themselves. I think that at the very least Corneyman could devote a sizeable slice of his most popular blogs as free advertising space for those wronged, but yet again that will probably never be forthcoming. Why should he? Entrecard have not nor will take any steps against this kind of behaviour. Perhaps a warning to us all to beware of the disadvantages of a once far friendlier and inclusive blogging community.
By Rob on Feb 15, 2010 | Reply
To me, this just speaks poorly in terms of how the EC system works, that they can’t develop this widget to have the smarts to know that it’s on a real blog site. This problem, and other problems like dead sites in the EC directory, are two problems that should be fairly easy to fix. There are enough EC users that fixing something like this should be priority.
By David on Feb 16, 2010 | Reply
Hey, you’ve got a nice blog here.
Good job, bro!
By janaesjewels on Feb 16, 2010 | Reply
Sheila,
I’ve been stewing about this for days.
I’m still a new blogger and not having been around Entrecard long enough for anyone to have alerted me to the “ghostdropper” issue, I found it while perusing blogs and dropping ec’s.
Although I don’t condone “cheating” I want to know how on EC do you draw the line between the many drop programs that make dropping faster and easier and cheating? I have a fast drop widget on my blog – and see many of the same (plus others) on many of the blogs that I visit regularly.
Where is the line in the sand?
I chalk it up to kid behavior in adult clothing.
“It’s not fair” rings in my ears…(dripping with sarcasm)
No matter what EC says or does, if your blog is not worth reading, droppers will hit and run. If you don’t have the “hook” that pulls them in and creates the urge to comment you are just going to have to work harder (like me-sm).
It’s all a process and the haters only bring everyone down.
Personal responsibility…that’s what I tout!
Peace out…
By Aftercancer on Feb 16, 2010 | Reply
Wow, well said. I applaud your calm and rational discussion of the issue which is more than I would have had if I had been accused. Keep up the good work!
By Anne on Feb 16, 2010 | Reply
I have to admit, I saw that article and I ignored it. I know a number of the bloggers that were singled out and I can’t imagine them “scamming the system.” I was trying to reconcile the 2 different thoughts in my mind. EC seems to bring out very strong emotions in other people. I will miss some of the people that are leaving because of this. It always seems to be the good ones who leave.
By RE - Entrepod on Feb 18, 2010 | Reply
so two weeks later, what have we seen from entrecard in reaction to Cornyman’s Hoax ? his accusations against all these blogs is more than wrong; but it’s entrecard’s lack of response to the accusations that trouble me more, honestly.
removing two of my blogs has brought me such relief that I wish I had done it sooner. the drops and relationships with those who visit and comment will become much clear now that they don’t have that entrecrutch.
By WillOaks Studio on Mar 8, 2010 | Reply
I do agree with being polite and I was vaguely aware of the EC ghost bruhaha (but am not technical enough to understand how something like this can be done.) But I want to tell you why my EC ad was cancelled at the very last minute after I waited 2 weeks to fill the EC widget here on your blog. My account was capriciously deleted by EC today. Everything was wiped out–all my ads queued up for in and out. It was because I was anonymously reported for “not having an EC widget” and rather than contact me, they wiped me out. After all their stuff, I asked why they couldn’t contact me before, but could send an email informing after I was deleted? It was their error completely, they couldn’t “see” a widget that has been in the exact same place for months and months. So I’m very bummed to have lost all but a bunch of points. I do feel rudely toward that outfit. And I’ve blogged about all this in my post today and more for tomorrow. But mainly, so sorry I got bumped from being on your blog and not sure if I’m going to stick with EC.
By Sheila on Mar 10, 2010 | Reply
Willoaksstudio – Sorry I haven’t responded to this before now – I’ve been getting so much spam here I dread reading through the comments and had over 500 to go through. anyway, that really, really SUCKS that EC did that without contacting you. What did they say when you wrote them? Did you loose your credits? They should definitely put everything back the way it was. I’ll stick our widget on my blog anyway so don’t worry about that.
By Michelle | Online Poster Printing on Mar 11, 2010 | Reply
I think respect is something everyone of us wants from this world. There is an old saying that you should not do unto others what you don’t want others to do unto you. So if you want respect, treat people with the respect they deserve.