Wu you think "the man" is really talking about us! Whoa Sweet! I do get this whole early adopter and majority vibe -- BUT -- key point at the end of Seth's post (albeit out of context here) is "catering to the passionate is exactly what you should do." I'll add especially when they are passionate and squawking about an integral element of the product or service -- one of the things that makes it remarkable! At some point on some things I think it is best to listen and heed the Passionate Early AdopterS...the "PEAS" (could not pass up that sweet acronym).

I know the majority+ balked at Mr. Job's take on music -- how can "he" expect to sell to the Peas when the Peas are already stealing it for free? (did the Geico gheko just plop into your mind? me too:)) How can someone(Jobs) from outside the music industry possibly impact let alone transform the industry...IMPOSSIBLE! -- Jobs probably said something like, I know Bono and I can call him -- and U2 does not do commercials (yet) and U2 does not endorse products (yet) Jobs knew what was integral to that model and while he may have given in (not likely) on some things he would not give on the integral primal elements of brand/product. Nor should we! 

This Squidoo/Ad thing is bigger than some squawking from the Peas! If we go or worse lose passion about this watch out -- I know of a lot of the majority -- they are my friends (it can be a little precarious to hang with other Peas --you know:)) well the majority doesn't know squat about web 2.0 or lenses or RSS or Technorati -- worse they don't want to know -- so Squidoo dies. I know I promised to "lay down" at 10:13 today! Oh well its Wu's fault for pointing out that Seth was tuned in!

Last edited by michaelgibbons (06/07/2006 7:50 pm)

That's the point, Michael. It's what I hinted at when I asked: "The majority of what?"

Squidoo is not an election, the process doesn't depend on the majority's taste and ideological stance. Trying to make a good lens that is both appreciated and profitable is not like running for governor (or president).

Did Catana's lens on freeform crochet went #7 because crochet appeals to "the majority"? Of course not. It went #7 because that's a passionate niche.
Did Rachel went lensmaster #14 (out of several thousands lensmasters) because her lenses talk to a majority? Tribal tattoos? Alchemy? DEVO? Not at all. She's a popular lensmaster because she's a "post-renaissance woman", living at the intersection of several passionate niches.

That's what the "Long tail" is about after all: a proliferation of niches. Everybody's "far on the left/right" in this context. When it comes to our passions, we're all Pat Buchanans and Huey P. Newtons. All of us. We don't have to worry if we don't appeal to "the middle".

The first 25,000 users will "steer you wrong" only if you need/want to conquer the consensus of a homogeneous majority.
(Well, not always: think of the "first 25,000 members" of the German Nazi party in the 1920's: they certainly steered the party right from Hitler's point of view)
But they will steer you quite right if you need/want to aggregate as many passionate niches as possible.

Usually, passionate niches find browndowns and "shifts to the middle" quite repulsive :-)

Last edited by wuming1 (06/08/2006 2:24 am)

There are two different issues here. Some are complaining about having google ads at all, instead of just about position. It seems to me that google ads is a fundamental part of Squidoo as it stands. Certainly, when I got here, it was clear that a portion of proceeds was to come from ads placed by google.

How can we separate the placement issue from the issue of google ads in general, so we can be clear about what we're advocating?

Angela

AngelaHarms wrote:

Some are complaining about having google ads at all, instead of just about position.

Uh? And who are they?

Like so many other things in life once you spotlight and focus on something you start to think.. first I thought OK google ads down the side -- they are both ubiquitous and usually benign -- cool maybe this Squidoo thing is for real! IF my lens readers choose to check out one of the ads no matter -- in that position IT LOOKS like something google placed not ME!
Now I have concern about the nature of google ads placed t the top of my lens.
Personally I take offense to the following ad placed on my http://www.squidoo.com/charitywalks/ lens today:

"Awareness Bracelets"
Directory Of Awareness Bracelets. Find Awareness Bracelets Quickly.
JewelryMarketplace.net

Reason -- many of these "awareness" bracelets are a scam -- politely -- not a lot of the money is making it to the charities! Not the kind of think I want on my lens!

So for me this started "about position" -- NOW that the ads are in the PRIME Squidoo real estate -- Park Place WITH a hotel! Now I DO notice the ADs, Congratulations Google -- this is why they rule the world -- it worked -- I have even been curious enough to click on a couple to see IF they were selling what they Squawked -- uh no -- the Alzheimer's Society headline took me to the infamous "entertainmnet coupon book" (and to think I bought one from a middleshcooler on behalf of Alzheimers!) -- BAD when I have a lens that provides information on several charity walking events -- NOW it looks like I am hawking the entertainment book which is 180 degrees from the vision for my lens!  That is what many of my visitors will think -- here we go again another website trying to make a buck off charities! That is a shame I had hoped to use Squidoo as a way to build a nexus of information and links for active charity fundraising events! Oh and Google does not care they got paid for my clicks!

So yeah when the ads were down the side I did not notice them, neither did my visitors -- well THAT is not a good thing for google -- so they got them moved QUICK! So we know what's good for google, what's good  for Squidoo?? Why can't google just print more money and leave us alone --

Last edited by michaelgibbons (06/08/2006 1:00 pm)

Ads are part of the landscape. I expect them, sometimes look at them, and even have been known to click through!  The top placement bothers me because it intrudes in the lens and jars the focus of my arriving guest. It's really bad when the ad is way off topic or looks like a scam. But the issue for me is that it decreases the effectiveness of the lens, and will thus decrease the effectiveness (and growth) of the Squidoo concept.

I assumed that it was an attempt by Squidoo to increase revenue from Google and can't blame them for that. However, it’s a possible short-term gain and a more possible long-term threat.

AngelaHarms wrote:

There are two different issues here.  ... How can we separate the placement issue from the issue of google ads in general, so we can be clear about what we're advocating? Angela

Throwing a bit of fuel on the fire here. I recently came across a very good self-promotional lens by a novelist. Since I have a friend who is a self-published novelist, I sent her the link and suggested that she think about using Squidoo to promote her books. Today I looked at the novelist's lens again and at the top was an ad for someone else's novel. The keyword was apparently "historical novel" but the novel in the ad is clearly Christian evangelism.

I just emailed our Squidoo author letting her know what's appearing on her lens (didn't mention the xtian connection since the competitive angle is bad enough) and inviting her to the forum. She may not give a damn, but maybe she will. We seem to be a vocal minority here, but I'm sure many lensmasters have no idea what has happened or the effect it might have on their work or their decisions about their relationship with Squidoo.