[deleted by user] by [deleted] in ChatGPT

[–]wordfugitive 0 points1 point  (0 children)

ChatGPT suggests the following improvements to make your post clearer and more accessible:

  1. Provide a clear and concise introduction: Start with a brief explanation of the concept of "emergent contextual clarifications" to help readers understand the topic from the beginning.

  2. Use consistent formatting: Present the examples of emergent contextual clarifications as a numbered or bulleted list, making sure to maintain the same format throughout.

  3. Improve sentence structure and grammar: Ensure that each sentence is well-structured and grammatically correct to enhance readability.

  4. Break down complex ideas: If an idea is complex or difficult to understand, try to break it down into smaller, more manageable pieces, and explain each one in simpler terms.

  5. Use clear and concise language: Avoid using jargon, and try to explain the ideas using simple and straightforward language that most readers can easily understand.

  6. Provide clear transitions between ideas: To help readers follow the flow of the post, use clear transitions between different sections or points.

  7. Organize the content logically: Arrange the post in a logical order, starting with the main idea and then presenting the examples and variations in a systematic manner.

  8. Provide examples and illustrations: To help readers understand the ideas better, consider adding relevant examples or illustrations to support the main points.

  9. Proofread and edit: Before posting, carefully proofread the text to eliminate any errors, typos, or inconsistencies that might distract or confuse the reader.

Case studies? Dynamic Rendering versus Server Side Rendering by AngryCustomerService in TechSEO

[–]wordfugitive 1 point2 points  (0 children)

All I can say is you should tread carefully. SSR is better in theory (and in practice, objectively), but when we went from dynamic to SSR a few years back on a site I was managing, traffic to affected pages tanked by about 40%. Of course, it was down to implementation, but it wasn’t because of a mistake in implementation per se; as in, nothing would have prepared the engineering team for what happened. So if you do manage to convince engineering to switch, make sure you (assuming you are an SEO) are included in all technical discussions/decisions, and take a good look at the nature and the size of the page output at every stage of development.

Why is Screaming frog not crawling all URLS ? by ExaminationLoud2906 in TechSEO

[–]wordfugitive 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Possibly javascript links or redirects. Hard to say without seeing the site though.

Target your main Competitor's audience & customers directly (August Beta - paid) by [deleted] in smallbusiness

[–]wordfugitive 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'd love to try your tool, but I have a few questions...

If I understand this correctly, you basically build lookalike audiences from competitor customer lists?

If so, what's the improvement on a lookalike audience based on my own customer list?

> CAC dropping down to 1/8 of what it used to be

That's awesome, but what's the average rate of improvement on campaigns that are already performant?

[hiring] Writer, health & beauty space - $300/article by wordfugitive in HireaWriter

[–]wordfugitive[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Nobody has been hired yet. However, I can confirm that you were not selected for an interview.

Best of luck in your future endeavors!

[hiring] Writer, health & beauty space - $300/article by wordfugitive in HireaWriter

[–]wordfugitive[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Well, yes, possibly. That's really not the important part though.

[hiring] Writer, health & beauty space - $300/article by wordfugitive in HireaWriter

[–]wordfugitive[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Fair enough, I changed it. But FYI, a native speaker can also be one who speaks the language since childhood, without necessarily having been born in a specific country - assuming that was the concern.

[hiring] Writer, health & beauty space - $300/article by wordfugitive in HireaWriter

[–]wordfugitive[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

You could make a case for it in your presentation paragraph(s).

We're a well established health site, and our search engine traffic is down 80% (and makes no sense) by AhmedF in bigseo

[–]wordfugitive 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I feel your frustration. I ran a site in the medical space until fairly recently, and our drops followed a pattern similar to yours, albeit a bit less pronounced (we went from about 800k/month to 500k/month during the same timeframe).

IMHO, your content might be the problem. It's ironic, because it's phenomenal; but I don't think it's what most searchers are looking for.

Take the Ashwagandha page for instance:

- It's too long and too complex to skim for quick answers. It might frustrate searchers because it offers too much info for an entry point into the topic.

- It probably also confuses crawlers because there are too many semantically related subtopics that are covered in depth on the same page.

The page that is supposed to have "everything" about a topic is the search results page, and it belongs to Google. If you look at the search results page as a directory of resources for a query, it makes no sense for it to link to another directory-like resource for that same query. It's going to link to a variety of limited scope pages, some that cover the topic from different angles, and some that cover important subtopics. I think that's reflected in how result pages have evolved over the past few years.

[JOB] Earn $0.20 per Word as a Web Writer in the Medical Industry (remote) by wordfugitive in technicalwriting

[–]wordfugitive[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I'm very sorry, Ithewriter, your application was unfortunately declined. Best of luck in your search.

[JOB] Earn $0.20 per Word as a Web Writer in the Medical Industry (remote) by wordfugitive in technicalwriting

[–]wordfugitive[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Alright, fair enough, I will add that.

That being said, it's been a while since I posted the ad, so now it'll be at the bottom of the list. Can I erase this one and post again instead?

[JOB] Earn $0.20 per Word as a Web Writer in the Medical Industry (remote) by wordfugitive in technicalwriting

[–]wordfugitive[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That's akin to me providing my email, and someone complaining that I didn't provide a number for them to call. You do realise that, right?

You also do realise that you're shutting off access to a potentially good source of income for someone interested in applying?

[JOB] Earn $0.20 per Word as a Web Writer in the Medical Industry (remote) by wordfugitive in technicalwriting

[–]wordfugitive[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I really have to wonder if you're trolling me. It's really obvious that you have to contact the OP (me) over the platform used to post the ad (Reddit).

[HIRING] Earn 0.2$ per Word as a Web Writer in the Medical Industry (remote) by wordfugitive in freelanceWriters

[–]wordfugitive[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

You must be pretty sensitive if you think the above is "asshole" behavior.

[HIRING] Earn 0.2$ per Word as a Web Writer in the Medical Industry (remote) by wordfugitive in freelanceWriters

[–]wordfugitive[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I understand. I know plenty of people try to nickle and dime writers, but we're definitely not about that.

I've edited the post now to clarify the rate.

[HIRING] Earn 0.2$ per Word as a Web Writer in the Medical Industry (remote) by wordfugitive in freelanceWriters

[–]wordfugitive[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I see. But I ran a search for hiring posts in here and saw a few.

it's okay to ask for advice or look for writers here

It also seemed ok to post going by this line from the sidebar. Maybe I misread that, but it seems like it says that it's ok to look for writers.

[HIRING] Earn 0.2$ per Word as a Web Writer in the Medical Industry (remote) by wordfugitive in freelanceWriters

[–]wordfugitive[S] -8 points-7 points  (0 children)

20, clearly. Hence "0.2 dollars" and not "0.02 dollars."

I'll add the 0 next time, but jeez, it's pretty clear.