<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Submitting to Article Directories &#8211; Good or Bad?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.momgadget.com/submitting-to-article-directories-good-or-bad/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.momgadget.com/submitting-to-article-directories-good-or-bad/</link>
	<description>A Guide to Gifts, Gadgets, Gizmos and Product Reviews for Everyday Domestic Bliss</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 19 Dec 2011 15:07:21 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: John Hunter</title>
		<link>http://www.momgadget.com/submitting-to-article-directories-good-or-bad/comment-page-1/#comment-1173</link>
		<dc:creator>John Hunter</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 05 Aug 2007 23:08:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://momgadget.com/submitting-to-article-directories-good-or-bad/#comment-1173</guid>
		<description>I don&#039;t really see anything wrong with doing so conceptually.
In practice though any repositories that I looked at are so lame I wouldn&#039;t want to be associated with them.  If an article repositories took the responsibility to only include high quality articles - my guess is that in practice that would mean they need to be topical (in order to judge quality) I don&#039;t see anything wrong with participating.  I don&#039;t know if any do that though.  But if they are just collections of tons of not very worthwhile link generators they just seem like a way to try and trick the search engines which I don&#039;t think is a good way to spend your time.
You can always publish some articles on your site and provide an partially open license to republish them in their entirety...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I don&#8217;t really see anything wrong with doing so conceptually.</p>
<p>In practice though any repositories that I looked at are so lame I wouldn&#8217;t want to be associated with them.  If an article repositories took the responsibility to only include high quality articles &#8211; my guess is that in practice that would mean they need to be topical (in order to judge quality) I don&#8217;t see anything wrong with participating.  I don&#8217;t know if any do that though.  But if they are just collections of tons of not very worthwhile link generators they just seem like a way to try and trick the search engines which I don&#8217;t think is a good way to spend your time.</p>
<p>You can always publish some articles on your site and provide an partially open license to republish them in their entirety&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Heather Bixler</title>
		<link>http://www.momgadget.com/submitting-to-article-directories-good-or-bad/comment-page-1/#comment-1174</link>
		<dc:creator>Heather Bixler</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 05 Aug 2007 01:54:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://momgadget.com/submitting-to-article-directories-good-or-bad/#comment-1174</guid>
		<description>I say submit old articles, ones that have already been posted on your website for a length of about two weeks or more.  That way you receive credit for the original content, and then you can use them to help generate traffic to your website via article directories!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I say submit old articles, ones that have already been posted on your website for a length of about two weeks or more.  That way you receive credit for the original content, and then you can use them to help generate traffic to your website via article directories!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

