SEO style sites are immune from 2257 laws... don't wait forever to learn it! - Page 2 - GoFuckYourself.com

Webby · 05-29-2005, 08:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jojojo

??? I meant you can't take down your pics because they are explicit and thats what tgps/mgps want from you... you can't just email all the mgps you submit to and say "I've removed all the explicit content from my galleries... now its nothing but non explicit ads to the paysite"

hell.. I must be very SLOW!! :-) Basically... if I get it right this time round, you are suggesting you knowingly submit to tgp's and then remove image linkage?

Sounds too smart ass for me... I prefer to do as I say and operate outside the US and ingore their laws.

Juicy D. Links · 05-29-2005, 08:06 PM

50.....................

Webby · 05-29-2005, 08:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chimmy

Wow...this has my vote for most frustrating thread of the day. Granted, jojojo didn't explain the "explicit image" issues very well...but still, are the rest of you that daft that you really couldn't understand what he was "trying" to say.

No offence to jojojo.. but if he can't explain the "explcit image" shit - he needs some more fundamental stuff sorted out first before bothering about SEO.

jojojo · 05-29-2005, 08:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Webby

hell.. I must be very SLOW!! :-) Basically... if I get it right this time round, you are suggesting you knowingly submit to tgp's and then remove image linkage?

Sounds too smart ass for me... I prefer to do as I say and operate outside the US and ingore their laws.

O.o are u joking.... u still don't get it??

I haven't submitted to tgps/mgps in years.....

ok let me explain this one more time really slow....

IF YOU SUBMIT TO MGPS AND TGPS YOU MUST FOLLOW THEIR RULES WHICH MEANS HAVING PICS OF EXPLICIT CONTENT (DUH THE WHOLE PURPOSE OF A GALLERY)... IF YOU TRY AND REMOVE THE PICS YOU WILL BE BANNED (DUH)

If you make sites that are designed for SE's only... these sites aren't submitted to tgps and mgps therefore you are not bound by any rules... your site can be nothing but ads, text, whatever the hell you want to put on the page you can do without jeapordizing traffic.

please tell me you finally understand :|

radical · 05-29-2005, 08:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jojojo

yet there are still people making less than $2k/mth in this business... why is that? why isnt everyone making $30,000/mth?

A whole bunch of generic information is not enough to be successful.

Simple, if certain webmasters are only making say "$2000" per month then simply their not working hard enough.

Also there is a few places on the web where there is more than a whole bunch of generic information!

Seek and ye shall find, it's that simple

Webby · 05-29-2005, 08:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jojojo

O.o are u joking.... u still don't get it??

please tell me you finally understand :|

Hell.. I got an easier way!! Can I just buy ya a drink instead???

BlingDaddy · 05-29-2005, 08:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Webby

Sounds too smart ass for me... I prefer to do as I say and operate outside the US and ingore their laws.

Not to be snobby... but this is exactly the reason that the US govt is enacting this. Not accusing anyone of anything but far too many people prefer to operate "outside the US, and ignore their laws".

This has led to the permutation of CRAP.

People with this philosophy need to wake up.... where are the top 10 Search Engines located? IN THE MOTHER FUCKING US. After 2257 is in full effect the SE's will be developing filters and blocks that stop access to adult from non-compliant sites. It won't matter if your shit is on the moon... Did anyone consider that?

jojojo · 05-29-2005, 08:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BlingDaddy

Not to be snobby... but this is exactly the reason that the US govt is enacting this. Not accusing anyone of anything but far too many people prefer to operate "outside the US, and ignore their laws".

This has led to the permutation of CRAP.

People with this philosophy need to wake up.... where are the top 10 Search Engines located? IN THE MOTHER FUCKING US. After 2257 is in full effect the SE's will be developing filters and blocks that stop access to adult from non-compliant sites. It won't matter if your shit is on the moon... Did anyone consider that?

I agree... thats why its best to use no images at all in promotion... let them join a paysite and pay some $$ if they want content...

Chimmy · 05-29-2005, 08:22 PM

Always here to offer a helping hand....

Here's what Jojojo has been trying to say to all of you...but in my own words

Those of you who decide to continue to generate your traffic through tgp's and mgp's will need to ensure that all of your galleries are compliant with the new 2257 regs.

Not to mention that all of your galleries that you have submitted in the past, that are archived on tgp and mgp sites, will probably be illegal after June 23rd, as they will not comply to the new 2257 regs.

So, jojojo has a very good point. And here is where I think most of you are confused. He is NOT saying yoiu can make a SEO page, and leave explicit images on it, without complying to the new regs. He IS saying that with a SEO page, you don't need to include any sexually explicit images on it at all.

So, with the quickly approaching June 23rd deadline, I agree with jojojo. SEO certainly does look like a good route to go.

TheJimmy · 05-29-2005, 08:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Webby

I got a nice ebook course that normally sells for $199.95 - but got a special offer where you save $190... just $9.95! It's even got a special two page section on Google :-)

ooo, shame on you, you selling the seobook.com's book for a knockoff price?

I'll see your seobook and raise you one googlecash

BlingDaddy · 05-29-2005, 08:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jojojo

I agree... thats why its best to use no images at all in promotion... let them join a paysite and pay some $$ if they want content...

Yeah? My consulting fee is $200 per hour. "How to make money in adult after June 23rd" will be on sale when I wake up.

radical · 05-29-2005, 08:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chimmy

Always here to offer a helping hand....

Here's what Jojojo has been trying to say to all of you...but in my own words

Those of you who decide to continue to generate your traffic through tgp's and mgp's will need to ensure that all of your galleries are compliant with the new 2257 regs.

Not to mention that all of your galleries that you have submitted in the past, that are archived on tgp and mgp sites, will probably be illegal after June 23rd, as they will not comply to the new 2257 regs.

So, jojojo has a very good point. And here is where I think most of you are confused. He is NOT saying yoiu can make a SEO page, and leave explicit images on it, without complying to the new regs. He IS saying that with a SEO page, you don't need to include any sexually explicit images on it at all.

So, with the quickly approaching June 23rd deadline, I agree with jojojo. SEO certainly does look like a good route to go.

Put it this way, anyone in their right mind would not use sexually explicit images on an seo page in the first place, I've never used sexually explicit images on any seo pages I've built, at the extreme maybe the odd nipple here and there, obviously some sites do display like mgp's and tgp's etc etc

Unique text based content has always been one of the outlining facts with regards to seo, many sites out there will rank high for certain keywords when they switch from a thumb based layout to text etc

jojojo · 05-29-2005, 08:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by radical

Put it this way, anyone in their right mind would not use sexually explicit images on an seo page in the first place, I've never used sexually explicit images on any seo pages I've built, at the extreme maybe the odd nipple here and there, obviously some sites do display like mgp's and tgp's etc etc

Unique text based content has always been one of the outlining facts with regards to seo, many sites out there will rank high for certain keywords when they switch from a thumb based layout to text etc

Yes this is the whole point of why I posted... if you have any banners/images with explicit content you can take them done no problem - the main point IS that you can build sites with no explicit content and get ranked high... you don't need any content to make a boatload of $$ in SEO.

Webby · 05-29-2005, 09:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BlingDaddy

Not to be snobby... but this is exactly the reason that the US govt is enacting this. Not accusing anyone of anything but far too many people prefer to operate "outside the US, and ignore their laws".

This has led to the permutation of CRAP.

People with this philosophy need to wake up.... where are the top 10 Search Engines located? IN THE MOTHER FUCKING US. After 2257 is in full effect the SE's will be developing filters and blocks that stop access to adult from non-compliant sites. It won't matter if your shit is on the moon... Did anyone consider that?

The US govt is something that manages the US badly. It is not a govt that has *any* rights on other nations else why don't we all observe the laws of Angola?

I never did comply with any laws of the US - simply because they were not the laws I live under. But... I did comply with the principle of 2257 as it was, since this was at least an effort to protect children.. tho the enforcement to back it up has been an utter disgrace and most likely, will continue that way.

Under no circumstances is any person from another country - and one who has no servers in US territory obliged to comply with laws like this. They are irrelevant and unenforceable elsewhere and sure, will be the subject of more than one case.

Sure... the moment this current bullshit starts messing with other nations, they are not going to sit quiet and adopt the "one nation under God" bullshit.

If you don't comprehend the concept that this is a hypocritical law that in no way enhances the protection of children, (which many would be in agreement with and actually comply), but a raving idiot piece of legislation out of a perverse govt which is now abusing ideas of child protection for their own bullshit religeous/political scenarios. I pity the children in the US who are abused - they ain't got a hope - just tell em God is looking after them.

On engines... of course there is more than a fair chance the US will propose censoring them as well - it's part of the warped makeup of the current Administration. However, the net will be here long after they have gone.

Webby · 05-29-2005, 09:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheJimmy

ooo, shame on you, you selling the seobook.com's book for a knockoff price?

I'll see your seobook and raise you one googlecash

Suppose I gotta look guilty and apologise now?? :-)

TheJimmy · 05-29-2005, 09:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Webby

Suppose I gotta look guilty and apologise now?? :-)

nope, not at all

information wants to be free lol...

but glad I never bought that one, can't say the same for googlecash, I acutally bought that one...but these are some interesting reviews on the seobook LOL

http://www.web-advertising-info.com/seobook/

:/

xxxjay · 05-29-2005, 09:58 PM

This is a bullshit thread using 2257 fear to push SEO consulting.

jojojo · 05-29-2005, 10:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by xxxjay

This is a bullshit thread using 2257 fear to push SEO consulting.

Since when is using fear based advertising "bullshit"?

Everyone uses this form of marketing so why is it all of sudden "bullshit"?

If someone chooses to stop submitting/dealing with hardcore/explicit content that is one less person to add to the problem isn't it? Sounds like I am helping everyone here... except people who already work the SE's themselves... so your response/attitude toward this makes sense.

WiredGuy · 05-29-2005, 11:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fris

why would i pay some gimp 1000$ i never heard of when wiredguy does all my seo for free

Hey! I don't want people ICQ'ing me for free SEO!
WG

jojojo · 05-29-2005, 11:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WiredGuy

Hey! I don't want people ICQ'ing me for free SEO!
WG

So should they email instead?

UniqueMovies · 05-30-2005, 12:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jojojo

So should they email instead?

I sen't you an ICQ msg, but no reply.

Webby · 05-30-2005, 12:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheJimmy

nope, not at all

information wants to be free lol...

but glad I never bought that one, can't say the same for googlecash, I acutally bought that one...but these are some interesting reviews on the seobook LOL

http://www.web-advertising-info.com/seobook/

:/

OK!.. Gotta admit something! I've never read the seobook or googlecash... but I was the biggest mug for all and every bit of software that was released relating to se promo :-)

Ya want a cupboard of se submission software going back ten years ??

It's gotta be worth antique value soon!

xxxjay · 05-30-2005, 01:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jojojo

Since when is using fear based advertising "bullshit"?

Everyone uses this form of marketing so why is it all of sudden "bullshit"?

If someone chooses to stop submitting/dealing with hardcore/explicit content that is one less person to add to the problem isn't it? Sounds like I am helping everyone here... except people who already work the SE's themselves... so your response/attitude toward this makes sense.

Everybody is putting the "2257" buzzword in EVERYTHING and it is distracting from the real issue at hand. It is not very often that I will judge somebody like this, but I think it is just unethical. We need to pay attention to the real matter at hand instead of profiteering from a bad situation.

It's like being one of those ambulence chaser lawyers...very slimey.

I am hardly worried about your competition.

jojojo · 05-30-2005, 01:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by xxxjay

Everybody is putting the "2257" buzzword in EVERYTHING and it is distracting from the real issue at hand. It is not very often that I will judge somebody like this, but I think it is just unethical. We need to pay attention to the real matter at hand instead of profiteering from a bad situation.

It's like being one of those ambulence chaser lawyers...very slimey.

I am hardly worried about your competition.

You are doing the same thing pushing OCcash saying how you are 2257 complient blah blah don't act all righteous...

2257 is a shitty reality... switching your focus to SEO style sites is definitely a solution that works.

Webby · 05-30-2005, 01:25 AM

Just listen to WG jojojo...

Quote:

There is no money to be made in SEO

I'm hoping to earn a full dollar this week off engines - but I might have to persuade some friends to signup to reach that target

But.. least my earnings are tax free...

xxxjay · 05-30-2005, 01:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jojojo

You are doing the same thing pushing OCcash saying how you are 2257 complient blah blah don't act all righteous...

2257 is a shitty reality... switching your focus to SEO style sites is definitely a solution that works.

Wrong again. I never pushed OCCash off as "2257 compliant". We are in the same boat everyone else is. I made one post saying that we were aware of the issue, just so our webmasters knew that we were not sleeping on it:

http://www.gofuckyourself.com/showthread.php?t=472860

Get your facts right before you put words in my mouth.

Trying to make money off 2257 fear is like sucking the oxygen out of the room and standing there with a bag of air and charging people to breathe.

Come up with a new angle to hawk your SEO.

jojojo · 05-30-2005, 01:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by xxxjay

Wrong again. I never pushed OCCash off as "2257 compliant". We are in the same boat everyone else is. I made one post saying that we were aware of the issue, just so our webmasters knew that we were not sleeping on it:

http://www.gofuckyourself.com/showthread.php?t=472860

Get your facts right before you put words in my mouth.

Trying to make money off 2257 fear is like sucking the oxygen out of the room and standing there with a bag of air and charging people to breathe.

Come up with a new angle to hawk your SEO.

There are a lot of people in this business who are afraid of what is going to happen over the next few years with this issue...

lol you act as if I am using this 2257 to rip people off lol

2257 or not - learning SEO is something these people should do anyways and this new sketchy 2257 laws are just another reason to do it.

WiredGuy · 05-30-2005, 01:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jojojo

There are a lot of people in this business who are afraid of what is going to happen over the next few years with this issue...

lol you act as if I am using this 2257 to rip people off lol

2257 or not - learning SEO is something these people should do anyways and this new sketchy 2257 laws are just another reason to do it.

But the way you worded your thread seems to me a scare tactic to get people to buy your SEO tutorials/consultation. The use of 2257 and SEO have very little to do with each other, it just so happens to be a hot topic of conversation with the upcoming law going into effect in a few weeks. If you want to peddle your SEO, try doing it without scaring people into it. It will work much better in the long run.

WG

xxxjay · 05-30-2005, 01:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WiredGuy

But the way you worded your thread seems to me a scare tactic to get people to buy your SEO tutorials/consultation. The use of 2257 and SEO have very little to do with each other, it just so happens to be a hot topic of conversation with the upcoming law going into effect in a few weeks. If you want to peddle your SEO, try doing it without scaring people into it. It will work much better in the long run.

WG

Well put!

You going to San Diego?

WiredGuy · 05-30-2005, 01:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by xxxjay

Well put!

You going to San Diego?

Nah, going to Florida Internext for my next show. Have a great time in SD Jay.
WG

jojojo · 05-30-2005, 02:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WiredGuy

But the way you worded your thread seems to me a scare tactic to get people to buy your SEO tutorials/consultation. The use of 2257 and SEO have very little to do with each other, it just so happens to be a hot topic of conversation with the upcoming law going into effect in a few weeks. If you want to peddle your SEO, try doing it without scaring people into it. It will work much better in the long run.

WG

lol I don't need scare people. They are already scared. I'm bringing up an obvious fact - that those with SE pages don't need to conform to tgp/mgp rules and therefore dont need to use content.

Some people didn't even realize that this was the case. Now they know and now they know there is a way to learn

WiredGuy · 05-30-2005, 02:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jojojo

lol I don't need scare people. They are already scared. I'm bringing up an obvious fact - that those with SE pages don't need to conform to tgp/mgp rules and therefore dont need to use content.

Some people didn't even realize that this was the case. Now they know and now they know there is a way to learn

So why did you bring up 2257's then? You could have just said no content needed - SEO your site... etc. etc.

WG

xxxjay · 05-30-2005, 02:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jojojo

lol I don't need scare people. They are already scared. I'm bringing up an obvious fact - that those with SE pages don't need to conform to tgp/mgp rules and therefore dont need to use content.

Some people didn't even realize that this was the case. Now they know and now they know there is a way to learn

Your arguement is wrong on so many levels and you just had 2 of the best SE guys in the biz tell you that. If you want to continue with your profiteering...fine.

jojojo · 05-30-2005, 02:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WiredGuy

So why did you bring up 2257's then? You could have just said no content needed - SEO your site... etc. etc.

WG

Because people are looking for other ways to make money from the internet now that 2257 is getting so sticky... and most people don't know that SE sites can easily become immune to 2257 laws by removing their content.

People are scared about 2257 --- this specific aspect of SE style sites applies to 2257.

jojojo · 05-30-2005, 02:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by xxxjay

Your arguement is wrong on so many levels and you just had 2 of the best SE guys in the biz tell you that. If you want to continue with your profiteering...fine.

I really don't give a shit what other SEO's think... I don't expect any support from my competition

I've never got any love from other SEO's on this board but I have got lots of new clients... I don't expect anything to change... you and the other haters reply while people who don't reply are the ones hiring me on icq

xxxjay · 05-30-2005, 02:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jojojo

Because people are looking for other ways to make money from the internet now that 2257 is getting so sticky... and most people don't know that SE sites can easily become immune to 2257 laws by removing their content.

People are scared about 2257 --- this specific aspect of SE style sites applies to 2257.

Maybe if you repeat that enough times, even you'll start to believe it.

xxxjay · 05-30-2005, 02:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jojojo

I really don't give a shit what other SEO's think... I don't expect any support from my competition

I've never got any love from other SEO's on this board but I have got lots of new clients... I don't expect anything to change... you and the other haters reply while people who don't reply are the ones hiring me on icq

Yawn...I've been turning away SEO clients for months -- hell I'll send you the leads if you want them.

Me and WG are technicly competitors, but we still are friends (I like to think we are anyway - haha) so it ain't like that.

I just think what you are doing is wrong.

jojojo · 05-30-2005, 02:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by xxxjay

Yawn...I've been turning away SEO clients for months -- hell I'll send you the leads if you want them.

Me and WG are technicly competitors, but we still are friends (I like to think we are anyway - haha) so it ain't like that.

I just think what you are doing is wrong.

What is it that I'm doing? People are already worried about 2257.

I'm letting them know that you don't need content to make money from adult and that those worried about 2257 should get into SEO.

2257 is a big wake up call for a lot of people and they are looking for other ways to make money. I'm letting people know what the deal is with SEO and 2257 and how SE webmasters got it made in the shade as far as 2257 goes because we don't need content :D

You can forward those SEO leads to [email protected]

xxxjay · 05-30-2005, 02:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jojojo

You can forward those SEO leads to [email protected]

Yep, just as I figured.

WiredGuy · 05-30-2005, 02:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by xxxjay

Yawn...I've been turning away SEO clients for months -- hell I'll send you the leads if you want them.

Me and WG are technicly competitors, but we still are friends (I like to think we are anyway - haha) so it ain't like that.

I just think what you are doing is wrong.

I agree. Although people like Jay and Marc from Hoes are technically competitors, we bounce ideas off each other all the time to see what works and what doesn't. I don't see other SEO's as competition I'd like to get rid of but rather an ally to figuring out what the SE's have changed and whats working lately.

WG

jojojo · 05-30-2005, 02:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by xxxjay

Yep, just as I figured.

lol I'm being sarcastic I don't expect you send me anything

guschi2k · 05-30-2005, 02:35 AM

...damn jojojo, that was one misleading mofu of a title. why don't you stop spamming your SEO stuff already ???

jojojo · 05-30-2005, 02:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WiredGuy

I agree. Although people like Jay and Marc from Hoes are technically competitors, we bounce ideas off each other all the time to see what works and what doesn't. I don't see other SEO's as competition I'd like to get rid of but rather an ally to figuring out what the SE's have changed and whats working lately.

WG

well I've never got any kind of support from you in any of my threads over the years... or from any other seo guy for that matter. All I ever get is criticism... maybe its because I publically post my successful top ten rankings and that pisses of most other SEO guys...

Webby · 05-30-2005, 02:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jojojo

well I've never got any kind of support from you in any of my threads over the years... or from any other seo guy for that matter. All I ever get is criticism... maybe its because I publically post my successful top ten rankings and that pisses of most other SEO guys...

Sheesh.. this thread keeps hitting to the top and just read the header...

"SEO style sites are immune from 2257 laws..." DUH??

Cummon jojojo! :-) OK.. I know ya want to sell shit, but that claim is a bit bold!

xxxjay · 05-30-2005, 02:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WiredGuy

I don't see other SEO's as competition I'd like to get rid of but rather an ally to figuring out what the SE's have changed and whats working lately.

WG

So it's OK for me to post your priority ID tag?

jojojo · 05-30-2005, 02:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Webby

Sheesh.. this thread keeps hitting to the top and just read the header...

"SEO style sites are immune from 2257 laws..." DUH??

Cummon jojojo! :-) OK.. I know ya want to sell shit, but that claim is a bit bold!

No its not bold... it true... SEO style sites don't need content and/or can remove all content and thus are immune...

Any site that doesnt use images is immune.

xxxjay · 05-30-2005, 02:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jojojo

well I've never got any kind of support from you in any of my threads over the years... or from any other seo guy for that matter. All I ever get is criticism... maybe its because I publically post my successful top ten rankings and that pisses of most other SEO guys...

When I had been "been doing SEO for last 2.5 years" (notice the .5 - haha) - I would have done some newbie shit like that. You have never even been on my radar until now and it isn't becasue of your SEO -- it's your shitty ethics that got you noticed.

Maybe you get so much "criticism" because you are easy not to like. You claim your are not profiteering off 2257, but look at the title of this thread.

I wonder how your "clients" must feel..that is...if you have any by the time this thread is over.

jojojo · 05-30-2005, 02:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by xxxjay

So it's OK for me to post your priority ID tag?

You don't need a priority ID tag when you use this backdoor url to submit - just type in any 23 characters and it will work

http://www.google.com/priority_id_su...rs/submit.html

jojojo · 05-30-2005, 02:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by xxxjay

When I had been "been doing SEO for last 2.5 years" (notice the .5 - haha) - I would have done some newbie shit like that. You have never even been on my radar until now and it isn't becasue of your SEO -- it's your shitty ethics that got you noticed.

Maybe you get so much "criticism" because you are easy not to like. You claim your are not profiteering off 2257, but look at the title of this thread.

I wonder how your "clients" must feel..that is...if you have any by the time this thread is over.

lol how is posting examples of top ten rankings "newbie shit"??

It's because of those examples that I have got so many new clients.

I have never seen another self proclaimed seo guy post an example of a top ten result. Most seo guys are nothing but fancy lipservice.

I never said I wasn't profitting from 2257 laws

I said don't make it out like I am ripping people off or acting unethically by providing people with the truth about seo and how if you work the se's only you don't even have to worry about the 2257 laws.

Webby · 05-30-2005, 03:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jojojo

No its not bold... it true... SEO style sites don't need content and/or can remove all content and thus are immune...

Any site that doesnt use images is immune.

Sure ain't what the header says!! :-)

It does say that SEO sites are immune from USC 2257 - not that they are immune as long as you remove all images/content.

There could be one hell of a lot of use of browser back keys if the imagery ain't there! BUT.. often words speak louder! :-) Like in this instance....

05-29-2005, 09:58 PM	#67
xxxjay Tube groupie. Industry Role: Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: LoScandalous, CA Posts: 13,482	This is a bullshit thread using 2257 fear to push SEO consulting. __________________ http://donttellmehowtoruinmylife.com/ - http://www.jmdigitalmarketing.com/my...s-and-reviews/ - http://www.wouldyouhitit.org - http://shinyobjectreviews.com/

05-30-2005, 02:35 AM	#92
guschi2k Confirmed User Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: ...blablablabla... Posts: 489	...damn jojojo, that was one misleading mofu of a title. why don't you stop spamming your SEO stuff already ??? __________________ $$$ PimpRoll converts like a mofu, don't miss out on this shit $$$

05-29-2005, 08:06 PM	#52
Juicy D. Links So Fucking Banned Industry Role: Join Date: Apr 2001 Location: N.Y. -Long Island -- Posts: 122,992	50.....................

05-29-2005, 08:22 PM	#59
Chimmy Confirmed User Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 469	Always here to offer a helping hand.... Here's what Jojojo has been trying to say to all of you...but in my own words Those of you who decide to continue to generate your traffic through tgp's and mgp's will need to ensure that all of your galleries are compliant with the new 2257 regs. Not to mention that all of your galleries that you have submitted in the past, that are archived on tgp and mgp sites, will probably be illegal after June 23rd, as they will not comply to the new 2257 regs. So, jojojo has a very good point. And here is where I think most of you are confused. He is NOT saying yoiu can make a SEO page, and leave explicit images on it, without complying to the new regs. He IS saying that with a SEO page, you don't need to include any sexually explicit images on it at all. So, with the quickly approaching June 23rd deadline, I agree with jojojo. SEO certainly does look like a good route to go.