Ok, so. I have a blog. Blog lists an e-mail address. So I get SEO spam requests. "Dear R, I read your blogpost <url> and I really think it would benefit from the link to my post <url>".
The post being peddled is inevitably just dull or bullshit. It's only purpose is to rack SEO for the main domain, that always sells some shitty service or another.
I usually ignore such e-mails…
…but this time the guy is really persistent. And is getting on my nerves.
So, I have an idea. And I want to know how bad it is.
I want to respond with:
thanks for reaching out. My going rate for a link placed on my blog is $500USD, and I get to decide where and how I place it, and in what content. It will be placed in a regular blogpost on the blog in question, reachable by search engines, of course.
I require payment of the half of the sum (non-refundable) before I prepare the specific placement offer, for you to accept or reject.
The offer is final, and once rejected, I understand you are no longer interested in placing a link on my blog. At that point the initial payment is considered payment for my time and expertise in preparing the offer.
If you accept the placement offer, I will put the link on-line within 10 work days, and I will expect payment at the latest a month from it went online.
Please be advised that any further communication that is not a clear rejection of this deal as outlined herein will accrue a $50 processing fee; any such further communication amounts to acceptance of these terms.
Please let me know if these conditions are acceptable. I am looking forward to doing business with you.
Now, the questions are:
1. is this clear enough such that when the guy is unhappy with my placement offer, he doesn't get to sue me for some bullshit;
I am happy to report that a solid 6 days later (for the first SEO scammer) and 5 days later (for the second one), neither decided to send me a reply nor even a reminder.
So I chalk this up as a success. Usually I get a reminder after 3-4 days, and I got *several* from the first aforementioned nincompoop across about a month and to two separate e-mail addresses.
I guess I need to write this up.
You know, on my blog.
That attracts SEO scammers.
The next stage would be talking to a lawyer and figuring out if I can make this into a shrink-wrap EULA type thing (these are, after all, valid and binding as many lawsuits have "proven").
"Sending me an e-mail suggesting to put a link of your choosing on my blog confirms you have read and accepted these terms. The processing fee for such a requests is $100, non-refundable."
That could have two outcomes:
1. I never et to see SEO scam spam ever again.
2. I get to invoice a SEO scammer one day.
It is a lot of work, but as long as you have fun and can afford the effort, it is well worth the time. I love the idea anyway.
If there's good legal basis, this shit can be automated, or delegated to a counter-spam-attack commercial service that *will* send the lawyers and a bill behind their ass, when they are in breach to the agreements outlined in your communication exchange.
@humanetech yup. Tearing-SEO-scammers-a-new-one-as-a-Service, or TSSaNOaaS.
Just rolls off the tongue.
@rysiek As long as the idea of SEO itself doesn't ever actually come up in the contract, so you can blackhole the page with robots.txt and fail to link it from the frontpage/rss whoops
@rysiek I think you made this too cheap — and giving them a link in an anti-SEO article would still give them what they want (google-foo).
This should also be 500USD *per timeframe*, not a flat 500USD. 500 USD per week would be appropriate, I think.
A nofollow link could be different … but would still drive people there.
This Mastodon instance is for people interested in technology. Discussions aren't limited to technology, because tech folks shouldn't be limited to technology either!