Neil Patel has a great post “Get Stumbled Through Friends” which talks about starting a group of friends to, in a somewhat organized fashion, “look out for each other.”
Meaning, you post and vote for my stuff, I’ll do the same for you.
Why is this not gaming the system?
Why is it not spamming?
Because it is natural. I am not talking about hiring a squad of data entry people from India to go nuts on all your stuff. That is gaming the system in a big way and people are trying it, but there’s a difference between tricking an algorithm and tricking real humans.
It is very difficult to successfully game a Web 2.0 system precisely because real people, millions of them, are in charge of content now and they will nail you to the wall for trying to artificially bump your numbers.
Is it artificial to have a group dedicated to helping each other out?
Not at all. They won’t make THAT much difference in the first place. A couple votes here and there will simply get you in front of some other folks and then your content has to rock their world as well or it will die off.
But having a group of like-minded content submission and voting friends isn’t new. We do this all the time at ASC with our group with great success.
It’s all natural, no gaming and no spamming.
Here’s what you are doing:
1) You are vowing to your “buzz group” to look at their stuff FIRST and vote/submit it first before you go off helping strangers promote their content.
2) They are vowing to do the same for you and together you are more powerful than individuals.
Isn’t it natural to follow the content and progress of friends, associates, and partners?
Yes. That’s how social marketing and news sites work. You build a following. In this case you bring your following with you and build from there.
Everyone does it from the biggest sites on the web to the smallest.
All it takes is an agreement and a promise to stick with it.
I vote up and submit friends all the time and they do the same for me. And it is as much from liking my content as it is to scratch my back.
So build your social marketing buzz group and reap the rewards only friends can bring!
{ 3 trackbacks }
{ 3 comments… read them below or add one }
Jack, I see your point on the ethics of this strategy.
However, I believe the main issue here should be how biased the votes are within these groups of Friends.
The fact that I’m interested in a certain subject or even liked one of my friend’s articles doesn’t mean I’ll like everything he/she publishes.
If every member of the group ONLY gives a “positive vote” to his/her friends’ stuff when he/she truly feels like it, then I think it’s ok. Otherwise, I think it’s still a subtle way to game the system.
Then again, I may be wrong. I’d like to hear your thoughts on this.
Yes, people should only stumble what they like. There is no group in existence today that I know of that forces people to vote no matter what.
Of course no one WOULD know about such a group because it would be shut down and every URL the group was associated with banned from all the social sites.
This is why no one is made to vote for anything – no one CAN be made to vote for anything that they don’t like.
But having a group of people who ban together to read each other’s stuff before anyone else’s is nothing more than what Oprah does with her book club.
She’s NEVER been accused of “gaming” the New York Times best seller list even though she’s responsible for putting hundreds of books on it single handedly with her reading club.
Totally agree with you Jack.
I have certain people that I follow, and I always check their stuff first. Does it mean that I stumble EVERYTHING that they submit? …uh No, but it does mean that I try to stumble or plug or whatever things that are of interest to me. And I hope my friends and followers would do the same.
I also try and expand my circle or community and find new blogs all the time with stuff that interests me, and I try to help them out too!