December 1st, 2011 / 12:25 pm
Contests

ToBS R1: livetweeting vs. [yourauthorname].com

[Matchup #5 in Tournament of Bookshit]

at first, this seems like a simple issue of SEO (Search Engine Optimization). if we can choose which of these chill concepts is better for SEO, we can make a pretty fucking nice decision.

SEO from Wikipedia:

“As an Internet marketing strategy, SEO considers how search engines work, what people search for, the actual search terms typed into search engines and which search engines are preferred by their targeted audience. Optimizing a website may involve editing its content and HTML and associated coding to both increase its relevance to specific keywords and to remove barriers to the indexing activities of search engines. Promoting a site to increase the number of backlinks, or inbound links, is another SEO tactic.”

INTERNET LITURATURE thrives on grabbing the largest possible number of eyeballs from several key market demographics (angry teens, cool moms, depressed dads, etc.) and pushing the solid messaging that has made our community strong – sex, alcoholism, and the [blowjob?] lip-gloss of higher education. these concepts are essentially our core story, being spread across the globe at the speed of light. the key to critical happiness in modern literature is to be the one delivering theses stories in the most SEO way possible.

but of course, there is the little issue of likeability and loveability indexing – very keen modern concepts indeed. you see, when designing the user experience journey of your online writing personae, you must be concerned, not only with the quantity of impressions (via SEO strategy), but also the quality. you must make your fans love you. nobody will buy your chapbook if they don’t already love you.

on the other hand, what’s love got to do with livetweeting? livetweeting is about commentary and communal participation in real events. these things are fanciful and probably already ‘on the way out.’ it’s nice to say funny things in real time, but who has the time to be that interesting? i mean c’mon ladies.

love is all about universal access to identity. love is about knowing something exists – not about understanding it or exploring it or reading about it.

URL from Wikipedia:

“In computing, a Uniform Resource Locator or Universal Resource Locator (URL) is a specific character string that constitutes a reference to an Internet resource.”

you can’t talk someone into loving you. you can’t write someone into caring about your brand – it’s all in the intangibles. like search visibility. like being a part of a string of characters that connects someone to The Internet Resource [praise Jah]. chilling out, having a webpage that does your SEO, and not getting hyped to real-life events – those are the real future initiatives of literature in america, and globally.

therefore, i conclude that the chillest (and most totally excellent) concept is [your authorname].com

Erik Stinson

– – –

Winner: [your authorname].com

Tags: ,

17 Comments

  1. BoomersMustDie

      Winner should really depend on one’s Klout

  2. David Fishkind

      i had live tweeting going so far you asshole

  3. c2k
  4. Anonymous

      There should be a prize for the person who gets every single pick wrong.

  5. barry

      started so strong at 3/3, then went 0/3 on the last stretch. i blame these asshole judges. 

  6. Erik Stinson

      regrets

      sucka

  7. Leapsloth14

      Who would name a blog after themselves?

  8. ZZZZZIPPP

      DAVID ZZZZIIPPP THINKS YOU ARE RIGHT. THIS POST IS A ROBBERY. HARDING IS INVOLVED SOMEHOW. HARDING BLOGGED THIS POST FOR ERIK STINSON AFTER HIJACKING HIS DISQUS ACCOUNT. TONYA HARDING. WHY WOULD SHE DO THAT. IS SHE BORED

  9. deadgod

      Sports pools have this function, and it can pay surprisingly well.  (If the selector is genuinely trying to pick winners of two-contestant contests, it’s hard to get every pick wrong in a slate or tree pool–much harder than to get every pick right.)

      Remember:  if you get all 32 picks wrong in the first round (spectacularly unlikely), you can’t get any more picks ‘wrong’–you won’t make a call in any later rounds, ha ha ha.  (In this kind of pool – 64 contestants, one on one, single elimination, whole tree filled before first contest – , the maximum number of wrong picks by the end of the tournament is:  32.)

  10. deadgod

      Someone who wants to be found by that name:  to sell, to hang out, to luxuriate in appreciation, to defy ‘cool’.

  11. deadgod

      Have you ever seen a picture of “Erik Stinson” and Tonya Harding near each other but not in the exactly same place?  . . . don’t ponder it, ZZZZZIPPP–or you might interact with a Higgs boson and become massive and subluminary.

  12. Leapsloth14
  13. deadgod

      cool wept

  14. Leapsloth14

      I think it’s so lame it will come back around and be cool again. Like heroin.

  15. conflictOinterest
  16. Anonymous

      phlpn.es/829r8s

  17. Anonymous

      linkhide.com.ar/47632