... or Hot Water?

If you have Google's adsense ads, be wary of joining a site called adsense-xchange. If, on the other hand, you have another brand of adsense style ad DO GO AND JOIN http://www.adsense-xchange.com . It's a great site for those who use other brands of ad-based marketing. But if you rely on Google's Adsense (as the title of the site implies) then this site is like internet quick sand: it will suck you in and swallow you whole.

The site itself is great. You can try it for free although, if you sign up right away, they give you $10 off the premier account. And, as long as your ads don't come from Google Adsense, you will make money with it. And, no, I'm not an affiliate. Here's My Story:

Adsense-xchange is a pay-per-click service, but the focus is on paid ads... those adsense ads on your site that have made you all of, say, $.28 since you joined. The understanding at adsense-xchange is that you view other people's sites (you must participate at least once every seven days) and click on their adsense ads and they do the same for your sites. Of course, you're only supposed to click on adsense ads that really interest you...

I joined last Tuesday, January 25 . By Saturday I'd made over $100 (from ads that have been averaging about $0.50 a month until now) and I was ecstatic. Then, last night, I got a letter from Google Adsense that said,

"...it has come to our attention that the ads on your site are being
clicked by an ad exchange service. This is in direct conflict with
our Google Adsense TOS..."

Well, only because I don't have time to re-vamp every site with new ads from a new company, I shut that puppy down, right away. (Sorry, Scott.) I admit, right after I joined, I visited their forum and found out this could happen. Several people had posted about "receiving the dreaded letter from Google." Some sounded like they felt very guilty about the whole thing. I replied, saying I thought that was ridiculous.

Hah. I see how far that got me. Well, I still think it's ridiculous.

What difference does it make if people are clicking on the ads because they belong to an ad exchange? Yes, there IS room for abuse (I wasn't born yesterday, thank you very much) but, if anything (and if Google bothered to actually visit the site), they would see that: 1) The site is very responsible about admonishing people to ONLY click on ads that actually interest them and 2) They warn against abuse and police themselves. If anything, all the ad exchange does is find a way to focus (there's that word again) on particular sites...

Does it mean those ads are being abused? No more so than in a regular forum. Sure, they're presented in an artificial environment but does that automatically mean the clicks were artificial? I can't speak for others, but mine weren't.

And, who's kidding who, anyway? I had an adword account for a short time-- I got all kinds of page impressions. But not one sale from them. All my sales came from articles I'd written. Yet Google had no problem charging me over $279.00 for about 2 weeks of ads... is that fair?

One thing I found particularly interesting: at the adsense-xchange forum another unlucky fellow who was "caught" by Google told of having his account closed and that they would not pay him any of the money they owed him... now, I wonder... seeing that Google has sophisticated enough software to track all these ads... will they refund the money to those people who's ads were clicked on? Or will they still be charged... what do you think? Somehow, I just can't picture Google turning around and saying, "oh, sorry. 10 of your ads were clicked on against our terms of service, so we're refunding your account." nope.

What gets me is, okay, they could detect the clicks had come from an ad exchange, which, in itself is pretty scarry... But, would that apply to another type of ad-exchange? Like Traffic Swarm? I have ads on there... According to the guys at the adsense-xchange, ANY sudden surge of ad-clicks sends up a red flag at Google. And, I've been watching my stats and growing them steadily. But I want to focus my campaign this month. So what if there's a sudden organic explosion of traffic? And they ALL click on adsense ads? What is Google going to do then? Are they going to send a letter that says, "we're sorry, but your sudden traffic surge goes against our TOS and we'll have to cancel your account."

One thing I HAVE made up my mind about: Thanks to Google and the way they've behaved, I've decided every time I visit a site, ANY SITE with google adsense, I'm going to click on their ads, just to support the site... Hey, let's see how sophisticated their software is now? The question becomes, can Google know my clicks aren't genuine? Can they track every move I make? Can they read my mind and get in my head? Can they cancel my account for WANTON AD-HOC clicking?

We shall see. ;-)

Further more, anyone who sees this... I advise YOU to do the same. Make it a point that, every single time you visit a site and see a Google Adsense ad-- click on it, wantonly... and send a silent blessing to that person that they made some money today. It's pay-it-forward time, guys!

After all, who IS Google, anyway?

Heck, they're just another search engine (in a sea of search engines). Though they'd obviously like to, they don't own the internet yet. They're just one company who happened to do one thing better than anyone else at that time. And now, with all their "free give aways" and all their "help" I feel like they're doing everything they can to worm their way into every website and slowly but surely take over the internet.

But as far as I'm concerned they're just another Rich Jerk-- another internet guru, with all the worst connotations the name implies.

But they don't own it. And they won't rule it. Unless we let them... go ahead... click --> I dare ya!--mo

Cold Coffee...

Well, I feel better. :)) Mind you, I'm not sure the ladies at the DMV will want to see me again anytime soon. Oh, well. Onward...

DIGG.COM I found the coolest site yesterday. It's called digg.com and it's a kind of a search engine, but one where the ranking is decided by the membership! Yeah. People vote on the sites they like and rank them accordingly. The more people who vote for your site, the higher you rank. Anyway, I popped over there and joined, adding two "articles" (sites) to the list. The site is primarily geared to the computer oriented person and most of the topics are directly relevant to that. Stuff like linux, programming and software are three of the topics. But it did have forays into gaming, movies and music, too. I read on the blogg where I found it that if your site makes the front page, you can get gobs of traffic-- because, apparently, digg.com is that popular. Anyway, I thought I'd pass it along.

I Yam Who I am

Any society that has over 50,000 occupants cannot
successfully endure.-- Socrates

I think it was Socrates, anyway. It may have been Plato. (Anyone who knows, feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.) After the morning I've had, I believe it. I had to get my driver's license renewed today.

For the first time in my life I decided (consciously, mind you) to wait until the last day that my old license was valid. I guess there's not enough drama in my life. Anyway, no, I didn't read all the brochures in the envelope the great state of NJ sent along with my form. I've been renewing my license for the last 20+ years... why should I start riffling through all the junk enclosures, wondering about something that hasn't changed in that long? Why should I even think it would? Sure, I was familiar with the "6-Points-of-ID" system NJ has. But only because my son got his first license last year. I had assumed that system was for those without licenses.

Needless to say, I was floored this morning when I also -- despite having a valid, current driver's license -- had to produce at least 6 points-- and more, since my name has changed (twice) since birth. Hoo-boy.

In total, it took me three tries before they believed I was who I professed to be. Three hours and three tries.

Now, I know about identity theft. Heck, I'm more aware of it and at risk for it than most-- working online (didn't you know?) makes you particularly vulnerable. That's why I wrote that article about it last month,
9 Steps To Prevent Identity Theft BEFORE It Happens.

Those tips and tricks can, at least, successfully prevent any one from giving away too much of their identity to a willing criminal. Of course, like any type of theft, if they really want to steal it, I suppose there's not much one can do. Anymore than, if a robber really wants to break into your home, they'll find a way.

And, considering how NJ has cracked down on drunken driving, I guess it is feasible to assume that someone of my age might, after losing their license to a DUI or DWI, get a fake ID. I don't drink that much (1 or 2 times a year) and I don't drive when I do drink. But I imagine the DUI laws have created a field day for fake IDs and their makers, opening up a whole new market of those poor souls who absolutely, positively must drive in order to get to work (around here, it's not a matter of choice) but because of (hick!-- sorry ossifer, but...) of one unfortunate indescretion (the one in which they got caught), had their license taken away.

But, what I really didn't understand -- as I first went home for my birth certificate, as well as both of my marriage and divorce certificates, then to the county clerk's office to certify one -- was why, in this day of computers, they couldn't simply check my current valid driver's license on their computer. I mean, it WAS a photo ID, for goodness sake. If it was invalid or had been taken away, wouldn't they have access to that kind of information? But I don't think they even checked it on their computer.

So, what's the big deal?

I guess it's because, between this and that movie, Flight 93 (the first movie about 9/11), aired last night that I just realized how much the terrorists have taken over. The identity theives as well, which is just another form of terrorism, if you think about it. No one knows anyone anymore, no one trusts anyone anymore, no one takes anyone at their word anymore...

Maybe Socrates (or Plato?) was right... maybe a society larger than 50,000 people can't survive. At least, not a civilized society.--mo