The Scribd tactic, mentioned in this article, is particularly shitty. Linking to articles under Google search terms increases SEO, but it still feels dirty.
I've never heard of Twine before, but I'm writing them to tell them in advance to bar content from my URLs. Is it a big site that I've never heard of before? Also: How would one set up a content policy on a web site forbidding use of the text published within? Certainly it's possible to make an attempt to persecute these copiers?
Scribd earned my permanent disdain for spamming engines with irrelevant content. Part of it is not their fault - my browser's flash plugin is very choosy and likes to lock up and crash my browser when their embedded pdf loads. But combine that with the fact that I've been repeatedly misled to their documents in the first place and I have a sort of Pavlovian response going.
(Not that I blame the Scribd guys for this. I would use and have used similar tactics, but it does have its costs.)
They wanted to become the "Youtube for documents" and they did. Nobody that I know of has a better docstorage method, and, like Youtube, Scribd feels cheap and often gives me results that lied about what they were to get views. I'm not mad at Scribd for doing that, since it worked, but I have to wonder who would willingly demean his life's work for the sake of popularity. Perhaps that's just my pretension speaking.
I've never heard of Twine before, but I'm writing them to tell them in advance to bar content from my URLs. Is it a big site that I've never heard of before? Also: How would one set up a content policy on a web site forbidding use of the text published within? Certainly it's possible to make an attempt to persecute these copiers?