Leaderboard

Now I also appreciate that there are some people who love to see two people go at it I hope I didn't miss anything "juicy"....lol. I popped in here yesterday and read something about me being trifflin' with nothing better to do. So I FOUND something to do! I went to a lecture last night about the targettng of Black boys and how the mass incarceration system played a huge role in this and thought about this thread. One of the speakers, a sister of Haitian descent by way of Brooklyn but relocated to Michigan and now works either with or out of the local Prosecutor's office drilled down on the "zero tolerance" policy in most public schools today where boys...especially Black boys...are being severely punished (expelled, medicated) for the most minor of disturbances. She's seen how this policy seem to be a starting point for how so many young Black men she's come across end up in the system. I've been noticing this for years. Black boys are facing much harsher punishments for things all of us did when we were kids like fighting or being late for class. They either get kicked out or they are labled as "troubled" and put on psychiatric medication. I believe this serves as an intimidation tactic also. I believe the plan is to produce a very timid, sterile, passive society where corporate America can treat their workers any kind of way without the fear of anyone standing up and challenging them in the workplace. This is one of the reasons I stress to young Black boys and girls GET YOUR OWN BUSINESS if you can. If people don't want to treat you properly in their system, you should find ways to create your own system of doing things.

My views about this subject has changed so much over the years... I've went from believing that Jesus was White as a child, to believing he was Black, to now questioning whether he even existed AT ALL. From the research I've done on religion, religious scripture, and the history of the Middle East; it's becoming apparent that much of what the Bible has to say about history BEFORE the Babylonian Exile period (about 500 B.C.) is complete fabrication. If I'm ever blessed to start my own school, one of the thing I will NOT teach is history beyond the 20th century. Because most of it can't be proven. The best most of us can do is just gather evidence and weigh it to make a determination of what really happened. A solid education starts with a firm foundation of FACTS, and you can't establish something as FACT if you can't prove it.

I get what you are writing, but it fails to address the primary point addressed in the video, when Facebook articles kicks in the articles will be read on Facebook. What you are assuming is that people will eventually click through to an RSS and by my own research they don't. In all honesty RSS feeds only work with high powered tech sites or sites that don't really need the traffic that arrives from a feed. What you have to consider is most people don't have feeds enabled on their site. They aren't even aware that they can do so through their CMS. But even by chance, everything you wrote is to the benefit of Facebook. Anytime you see Facebook native it is in regard to the content remaining on Facebook to improve their numbers. What I have is not a bias. I can't speak for Troy, but I've been reading and following his own tests in regard to the ability for Facebook to generate consistent traffic and social media simply does not do very well for non-social media that requires a person to actually click through and visit your site. You are excellent proof of this as you aren't even on Facebook, yet your site is gaining ground. Which leads me to this question, why would you even defend something that you don't use yourself? What Facebook articles is, in essence, is a frame. When a person utilizes a frame your website does not get a page view/load. This takes away the impression on that ad. You can be an advocate and look at the other side, but doing so means that you would be okay with losing ad impressions. Now, when a frame is used the ads very rarely show up. What's worse is this detail in the following quote reaffirms my thoughts: But there’s still an open question about what the impact of Instant Articles is for publishers. Facebook significantly restricts how many ads publishers can show in Instant Articles. According to its policy, “Each ad must be separated by a minimum of 350 words. If your article consists primarily of images or media, ads must not exceed 15% of the content.” For some sites, that’s fewer ads than they’re accustomed to showing. Meanwhile, the stripped down, sterilized design format can remove important links that help recirculate traffic to a publisher’s other posts, and that encourage people to pay for subscriptions, buy event tickets, or sign up for newsletters. The Wall Street Journal reports some publishers are now earning as much per click to an Instant Article as to a traditional page. But that doesn’t factor in the decreased likelihood of subsequent page views. http://techcrunch.com/2016/02/17/instant-articles/ As always this is a good, productive discussion and it is one that lurkers and posters will benefit from.

You're a very good writer! That always helps to make what you write, interesting. Everybody has a story to tell. but very few have a good command of language. I wish you well.