A blogger asks why Seth isn't talking about Squidoo's massive SEO and porn problems. They also speculate that I might be attacking Squidoo because they are competition for Mahalo.

For the record, everyone knows I attacking anything that has to do with deceiving users or the pollution of the "infovironment." My feeling is we have to expose anything bad on the internet including malware, spyware, bad SEO, PayPerPost, FederatedMedia's high-class version of PayPerPost, Squidoo, VibrantMedia, etc. If Squidoo were spam, porn, and SEO free--heck if it were SEO, porn, spam-light--I wouldn't even bring this up!

When I had SEOs on the last CalacanisCast they raved about Squidoo and it's ability to game the system, and if SEOs love your platform you have a HUGE problem.

Also, Squidoo is a publishing platform like Blogger or Facebook. It's not a search engine or even a directory. That's just not how it works. You can compare this by doing an iPhone, cancer, or Paris Hotels search on Google, Yahoo, Ask, or Mahalo and comparing it to Squidoo.

Frankly, I think Seth has fallen to the dark side and has become a Sith Lord of SEO, deceptive affiliate links, and page view gaming. I've known Seth for over 10 years and I respect some of the stuff he's done, but frankly Squidoo is so horrible it makes me wonder. Also, the fact that he won't address the problems is just, well, sad. Does he not care or does he not want to stop the SEO/affiliate gravy train?

I know I've got a couple of friends upset at me because they think I'm being too harsh on Squidoo, but the way I feel is I've been bringing up the Squidoo issue for a year now and Seth won't address it. Seth is polluting the internet just like spammers and sploggers, and he should answer for his actions (or inaction). Please, if I ever pollute the web call me out on it.

More squidoo stories.

TechCrunch doesn't see how Squidoo will ever work:

The best lenses are generating $30 or so a month for the lensmaster. A true expert on a topic could generate many, many times that number by creating a blog, along with some static content, and putting up simple Google adsense ads. So top content producers are not going to be heading to Squidoo for the money, ever (Squidoo's model is set up in such a way that they could never make as much money from a lens as they could on their own). And besides, the blog format just works better for experts - fresh content generates lots of links, which equals traffic and search engine juice.

I came to the same conclusion back in March:

I think it's not gonna work as it is structured today because there will be too many "experts" in each vertical, and the truth is that most folks are not really experts. Less is more. No one on Squidoo will do a better job covering gadgets than Engadget, stocks than TheStreet.com, or Hollywood gossip than Defamer. Real experts command real money, contingent money draws the weak experts.

Seth replies to my "Newsvine/Squidoo doing the MLM thing" post.

Seth says "Neal is correct. This isn't MLM, not by any definition (not that there's anything wrong with that.) You are entitled to your opinion, whether I like it or not, but your facts are wrong."

Squidoo's email offers:

"2. Refer a friend, get $5. When someone you've referred earns her first $15, you and she BOTH get an extra $5. Find out more here: http://www.squidoo.com/lensmaster/refer"

Wikipedia defines MLM as:

"In a typical multi-level marketing or network marketing arrangement, individuals associate with a parent company as an independent contractor and are compensated based on their sales of products or service (as well as the sales achieved by those they bring into the business).

I rest my case.

Seth does say he doesn't have a problem with MLM, so I'm not trying to pull a "gotch," nor can I. I'm just saying I don't like the talent that MLM programs draw.

Being the brilliant marketing maven Seth is I'm sure he loves MLM stuff (of course Seth is the same guy who defended the Buzz companies who's contractors were involved in deception back when).

As a publisher I *hate* MLM programs (schemes) because they draw the wacky people of the world. I'm all about the long tail, we based our business on it, however you get way down that tail and things can get really scary. There are a lot of freaks at the end of the long tail. The best producers don't need to play MLM games because they can command straight up fees. Why would they produce stuff for contingent/MLM compensation? I don't see it. In fact, Seth had a post yesterday about folks not being motivated by money.

Seth gives a couple of Squidoo sites saying "There is nothing on gizmodo or about like this, is there?"

http://www.squidoo.com/teajunkie/
http://www.squidoo.com/reymysterio/
http://www.squidoo.com/moleskines/

Nope, you won't find niche blogs/publications about one brand of notepad or individual wrestlers. However I'm sure there are some solid tea publications out there (anyone know the leading tea pubs?).

The problem with hyper-niche pubs is that they don't change enough and the readers don't need them often enough. Now, I'm sure Squidoo can make a nice business out of getting tens of thousands of people to make hundreds of thousands of these--provided that they are indexed well into the Google. However, it is doubtful that these tiny pubs will ever make any serious money for the folks who build them. Of course, the folks building these are doing it out of passion in large part (I guess).

I'm fascinated by Squidoo, it's a great mashup of a bunch of models (Wikipedia, About.com, Webogs, Inc)... I'm just don't think MLM stuff will work.

Update: Hugh's take on all this:

Got the note below from Squidoo today. I hate this MLM (multi-level marketing)/referrer program stuff. I know it works, but it feels icky to me. We thought about all these models when we started WIN and found that you're better off finding the best of the best and paying them well to make a "lens" of the web.

Quality folks don't do the MLM stuff. MLM stuff draws the low-rent, scammers of the world (think: the folks you know who join those viatim cults).

I love Seth (I would invest in NASDAQ: SGOD), and I think Squidoo has About.com potential, but I think it's not gonna work as it is structured today because there will be too many "experts" in each vertical, and the truth is that most folks are not really experts. Less is more. No one on Squidoo will do a better job covering gadgets than Engadget, stocks than TheStreet.com, or Hollywood gossip than Defamer. Real experts command real money, contingent money draws the weak experts.

[ Note: I know Seth's response will be that the best lens creators will be voted up, but the truth is that the best lens creators will never *show* up because they will be getting paid by folks like About.com, Weblogs, Inc. and MSM publications. ]

Here is the note from Squidoo today:

Great news!

Every penny earned so far in the Squidoo public beta test has been donated to charity. That's thousands of dollars for three
great organizations: The Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation, Room to Read, and The Acumen Fund. Congratulations.

But now... it's time to start paying YOU. From this point forward any royalties your lenses earn are well and truly yours. (And we're
backdating the start of the first pay period to March 1, 2006). Find out more about how you get paid.

So now what? Three things you should know:

1. We just introduced a powerful new eBay module. Highlight relevant products. Promote your own auctions. Share items you're bidding on. Get a commission on every item sold.

2. Refer a friend, get $5. When someone you've referred earns her first $15, you and she BOTH get an extra $5. Find out more here: http://www.squidoo.com/lensmaster/refer

3. Our new partnership with CafePress brings lensmasters and shopkeepers together. Get unique new lens content from the popular CafePress module.

Thanks, and let us know what you think!

The SquidTeam
Seth, Corey, Megan, Heath and Gil