Sunday, January 29, 2017

Shame On Google (or maybe not)

Ironically, I am posting on the Google blog, and I contemplated whether I should post this or not. Well I have decided I really don't care. Google has deleted 2 of my other blogs for violating their "terms of use", and I am sure this blog is next. I made quite a bit of money from 2003 to 2011 by helping beginners learn to design websites and monetize them. I had 19 of my own domains with varying topics like web design, template design, keyword optimization and gaming. Really what I was doing was just compiling information that was already available on the web, and for the most part free. Well in 2011 Google blacklisted my sites and banned me from "Adwords" (buying Google ads) because one of my sites listed the best affiliate and referral programs to make some money from the internet. It turns out that Google wants to be the only program on the web that can buy and sell advertising. Ironically, one of my leading referrals was to Google.

Now when I first started in 2003, a successful website was a quality informational site that was useful and informative. Ads (both banner and text) were to be used sparingly. There was actually a limit of 3 Google ads you could run on any given page - if you tried to run more than that, they would not display. SEO (search engine optimization) played a small part in how high you were listed on a Google search, and a clean well written web page could be rewarded with a generous first page search listing. This in turn led to more web traffic, which led to more clicks on Google ads. With the ads having relevant information related to your website's topic, it was a win win for everyone. As Google changed their algorithms on how they crawl and list your site, your site may rise or fall in a listing on a Google search. They claimed they did this to keep people from cheating on the SEO methods - a constant change would keep people guessing on how to make their site higher in the rankings. I think it was really done for money - if you look at the sites that are at the top of any Google searches, most are there to make money, not inform the internet user. And a lot of money gets paid to Google to bid on keywords.

This leads me to the purpose of this post. This is my rant and the paragraph that will get me deleted once and for all. This pisses me off to no end - Facebook probably gets the most hits (visits) of any website out there. And it is crammed full of "suggested posts", "sponsored posts" and something a friend of yours liked, so now you see it. If you have clicked these posts, you know what I mean, For example, "Man finds secret room, and you won't believe what he finds". You click that link on Facebook and you are taken to a page that has so many banners, photos and links, that even with a reasonably fast computer, the page takes several seconds to load. As the page is loading and the screen fills with images, a lot of times the desired subject matter moves around on the page. By the time the entire page loads, there may be 1 sentence or photo that is even related to the topic. To continue, you have to go to the next page. The "next" buttons or images are often hidden or disguised as ads, so even if you try to click next while the page is still loading, an ad will jump in the way and you click it by accident. So repeat this process 23 times just to finish the damn article. Every time you click a link, ad or image by accident, someone makes money and the ad supplier makes money (usually Google). (The only exception is if it is a link to another spammy site with more garbage).

So this is what pisses me off. The emphasis is not on quality informative sites, but on bullshit accidental clickage. That is where 90% of the money is being made on the web. Like I said before, I made my money, so this is just a sad observation.

But wait, there is a twist - I am always trying to think outside the box, and I would assume Google is too. Since this is all happening primarily on Facebook and Google does not own facebook, maybe they are allowing (or even promoting) these "whorehouse" sites to display on Facebook to create an overall negative distasteful view of Facebook. Like all popular sites, Facebook will fade away when the next great thing comes and I think Google is trying to expedite the process by polluting the site. I hope this is the case, if it is not, fuck you Google.

Monday, January 23, 2017

FotoJet Free Online Photo Editor - A Must Have

In today's usage of Facebook, and especially the garage sale groups, there is an urgent need for a good online photo editor. Some of the photos of items that are posted and listed for sale look like they were taken by a 3rd grader. With just a few steps and very little time, you can go to and crop, resize and make your photos look professional. (my favorite edit is "straightening") What I like about Photojet is that you do not have to create an account to to free basic online photo editing.

You can also create headers for your email and Facebook, collages, invitations, posters, flyers, cards and even Instagram posts. The interface is easy to use with the basic editiors right at your fingertips. The site is ad supported with banners top and side unless you upgrade.

Although I am all about free stuff, here is an idea: some people are afraid of photo editiors and don't want to pony up the price of one, then not be able to figure it out. With Fotojet, you can can try it out and get to know the interface and decide if you want to create an account. The advantages to create an account are well worth the $2.91 a monthe fee (if billed annually) because it will remove the ads from the pages and unlock a lot of features. Some of the extras included with your subscription are advanced photo editing available only on some costly professional edition programs. Subscribing will also unlock the amazing variety of templates in the design and collage sections.

So I recommend you go to and try it for free, if you like it, go ahead and subscribe. It is only 10 cents a day!

Friday, September 9, 2016

Geico Claims 97% Customer Satisfaction - My Take On The Statistics.

Yes Geico Insurance claims to have 97% satisfaction from their policy holders. In my opinion, that is not something to brag about. I will explain; Insurance, by nature, is supported by policy holders that pay their premiums and DO NOT file claims. And due to the low cost of premiums, compared to the high cost of claim payouts, many more people must NOT file a claim for the company to remain solvent. As a matter of fact, it probably has to be like 3 claims to every 100 policy holders that don't file a claim. So now you can see that 97% at at any given time are not filing claims, so they have nothing to be unhappy about. However, there are 3 percent filing claims, the same amount that would be dissatisfied according to Geico statistics. Therefore everyone that is trying to collect on a claim is unhappy. Is it just me or is there a problem here?

Saturday, July 23, 2016

World's Biggest Irony Involving The Zika Virus

They say now that the Zika virus can be transmitted sexually. So am I the first to point out that a virus that causes a little head can be caused by a little head? You can't make this stuff up!

Tuesday, August 28, 2012

Papa John's Customer Service - Good Will?

     Here is an experience I had recently, It may be trivial, but the days of customer good will are declining, and I want to see what the response will be from Papa John's will be, since they have a great feedback form on their website under "customer service".

     I wanted to take advantage of the Papa John's Pizza $5.99 1 topping carry-out special. So I walked in and ordered a large sausage with "light sauce" as my wife prefers Domono's. But if I am buying I prefer Papa John's. So I went into a different store to shop for the 15 minutes. I returned and it was done, so I grabbed it and drove home. When I opened the box, my wife pointed out that it was not "light sauce" and proceeded to scrape the toppings off and then get rid of all the sauce and tried to put the sausage and cheese back on. I then looked at the box and and it said "extra sauce". And in my house that is like culinary malpractice. So I called and talked to the guy in charge and he said he thought I said "extra sauce". He did say that he would make me a new "correct" pizza if I brought the bad one back with only 1 piece missing.
     Well I was already at the dinner table and my wife and I each had a piece on our plates that was almost eaten, I thought that request was rather odd. And since I had driven there and was already home, I really did not feel like going back, so I asked him if he could just take my name and in a couple days, when I felt like pizza again, I could stop in and get another $5.99 pizza. He said that was not an option and offered to make me a replacement pizza right now if I brought the other one back. I reminded him that a couple years ago that the manager screwed up one of my pizzas, and made me another pizza, let me keep both and gave them both to me for free! That was a great day in my life and gave me a great feeling about Papa John's. So I said "screw that" and hung up and I guess I was going to do Pizza Hut's $10 deal or Domino's from now on.
     Still being a little upset, and watching my wife struggle in the sauce pool, I decided to call back and see if he would deliver me another (free) pizza to my house. He agreed, so I asked if I could change it to pepperoni instead of sausage (per my wife) and he said "no" he could only replace the original order (sausage) - and to make sure there was not more than 1 piece missing. In about 20 minutes, a delivery kid came with the new "light sauce" sausage pizza. He opened the old pizza box to inspect it - well we smushed the remaining pieces around to look like a total of only 1 piece was missing, and I guessed it passed the inspection because he gave us the new pizza. And I have to admit, it was fresh and good and "light sauce".      

     My point is, I think that the "1 piece missing" rule is ridiculous. And it was a blatant error on their part to put extra sauce on a pizza ordered with light sauce, and in that case, to make the customer happy, all bets are off. I remember somewhere in the conversation, that the manager said "it comes out of my pocket", if that is the case, there is something wrong with the Papa John's system - making the manager financially responsible for maintaining customer good will?

I will update this blog with whatever the response is from Papa John's

     UPDATE September 8, 2012: I have received nothing back from Papa John's - I spent about an hour preparing and writing what I thought was a polite and detailed submission on their feedback page and NOTHING. I have lost confidence in the company - another company that got too big for it's britches. It's too bad too, I really used to like Papa John's...