I'm not sure it'll be a bursting bubble either. I know there are some signs that whats' going on is similar to the first time around, but I'd like to think we've all learned something since then.

Adam I see it more like you in that some people and sites will drop away and the ones that stay will evolve. Or new sites will come in and find a way to do things better.

Originally Posted by ADAM Web Design

The great thing about social networking sites is that most people have no idea how to use them to generate traffic to their sites.

The bad thing about social networking sites is...that most people have no idea how to use them to generate traffic to their sites.

What do I mean by this?

Basically, what Steve said. Most people are so busy trying to find a shortcut to getting into social networking sites and creating the newest BS buzzphrase (Social Media Optimization) that they fail to realize that the best way to draw traffic from sites like this is to build sites for their users and let the users do the work for them.

Sites that are well built can get hundreds or even thousands of visitors from social bookmarking sites with relative ease. But they require a little bit of effort, some originality, and something people can use. That's the secret...building a site for your users. Do that, and the rest will come.

can you show me how to get traffic for my social network site?

I don't think people are ever going to stop loving the bubble metaphor, but when you're talking about social bookmarking, media, and so on sites dieing out, it sounds pretty natural. Volcanoes and glaciers are both natural disasters, but they also leave behind open, nutrient-rich land. And then there's an explosion of life.

There's no doubt a lot of these sites won't be around in a few years. How many delicious or myspace clones do we really need? If it's that easy to game a lot of these systems, and there's a market in diggs, then some of them will give way to something more reliable. Unfortunately, the best don't always win, but in the long term, things have a way of working themselves out.

But the most important time in history is the present. This month I got 17 visitors from stumble ( last month it was more like 150 ), but more visitors from other sources, and more things to look into to build future traffic. Visitors from "social" web sites are plenty welcome, but it's best not to depend on them ( or any other single source ).

Forrest that last sentence of yours says so much. It really is important to get get traffic from a variety of sources. So many people only want to know how to get traffic from Google or maybe this month it's how to get traffic from Digg. But it's important to remember either site can make even a small change in their algorithm and it's bye bye traffic.

It's much smarter to get traffic from a wide variety of sources. Then if you do lose one maybe it only means you've got 10% less eyeballs on your site after a change instead of 80% less eyeballs.

Originally Posted by greenlush

if you have adsence on your site, your laughing Youll make a fortune.

Some research has been done on this and they found that on average, its not worth it. A while back on a dugg article, a guy mentioned that he had over 200K visitors and 2 ad clicks. He also got a $300 bill for bandwidth consumed.
Digg users are one of the biggest populations with adblockers, and those without are the least likely to click on ads.

Originally Posted by willcode4beer

Digg users are one of the biggest populations with adblockers, and those without are the least likely to click on ads.

I use an ad-blocker ( Firefox add on ), and I think if more people did, the web would be a better place. If I see a good site, something that impresses me, I'll tell my friends about it, as many of them would be interested. And I'll drop links in forums, when it's relevant or would likely be appreciated. ( See the thread I just created in the general forum of this site, on the history of spam, a Wikipedia article. )

So actually it turns out, if you follow the Will Code 4 Beer method of seo, that I'm a pretty good visitor. I won't click your ads - I won't even see them - but I'll do free labor of marketing your site. And a lot of the people I know just aren't sophisticated enough with the computer to know about ad blockers, let alone use Firefox and install one.

If people stopped thinking about making money from ads, and actually sat down to write good content, they'd make themselves more attractive for advertisers.

I also think a web site shouldn't be allowed to run ads for the first three or six months of its life. This is when people should be concentrated on building a good resource, not seo and ad placement. Once you have good content, and readers who enjoy your content, then you can focus on the ads, and things will work out much better.

Also, I don't spend money just because I see a fancy ad. But when I'm planning to buy something, there are plenty of web sites I'm loyal to, and I try to know if any of them have deals with any merchants. For example, one particular programming web site has a deal where if you click a link from their site to a low-cost computer store, the site get something like 3 % of the purchase price. So, when I'm in the market for a new hard drive, I'll dust IE off, go to the tech site, click the link to the computer store, and buy my drive.

In other words, I go out of my way to help out a site that provides me with good content, even if I have nothing to gain ( directly ). I'm loyal to quality, and like to reward people for it. Which is funny when you balance it against the fact I run an ad-blocker.

Hiya guys !! Had an exam last week. Missed a nice discussion. **** !! Anyway, John said,

I use an ad-blocker ( Firefox add on ), and I think if more people did, the web would be a better place.

Well, actually John, I won't agree to that. I mean, if advertising gets bashed up by people using ad-blockers, what would be the next alternative ? Reviews !! Advertisers will concentrate on buying reviews through sites like Review Me, Sponsored Reviews and think how scary it would be ?

The whole internet would get clogged with reviews. Almost every site you see will be review sites or will have a big section for reviews. But now, atleast, we can ignore the ads and we can concentrate on the content. But think what would happen if the content itself becomes ads ? How can we block this ?

So, I think ads should go on and as a matter of fact, ads are good, to an extent. In my cyber life, I've come across a lot of new things through ads. And, moreover, free sites would become scarce since they can't make money through ads. Even paid blogging will come into existence. Scary !!

Originally Posted by astrojith

The whole internet would get clogged with reviews. Almost every site you see will be review sites or will have a big section for reviews. But now, atleast, we can ignore the ads and we can concentrate on the content. But think what would happen if the content itself becomes ads ? How can we block this ?

By not visiting those (crap/spam) sites, which is the most powerful form of pressure on the internet.

Well, John, how can a guy know if its spam or not and what would happen if the whole internet is spammed ? I mean, reviews would be everywhere !!

I was just suggesting it, not accentually saying i do it. I know it goes on because link baiting has to accentually start some were and i know link baiting is one of the best forms of search engine optimisation, again im not saying i do it, im saying i know peaple who do it, and thats why i have the pr5's and 6's and they have the 7's and 8's