ok Janet, what's your secret- other than tireless hours in promotion, writing, updating, and maintaining every single lens to the benchmark (meaning you can't set it and forget it, what's that about?) that if you go lower your article is deindexed? I mean I walked away from (as in wrote no more at the time for 2 years) hubpages in year 2 300 articles in and a year later my earnings started to go up substantially- hands off- but on SQ I can't keep an article live on the dam site!
If it hadn't been for this happenstance (hubpages hubs starting to earn a year after I stopped logging in) I'd of never returned to these sites to write- it's that experience that showed me patience is the biggest skill set you need in this industry (IM).
The whole point of these sites is that you can build an article directory of a sort and earn from it- where does it state you have to put all those resources and countless hours fixing something not broke, only to be deindexed if you don't maintain it- what is this a personal web blog? No. It's an account on a 2.0 property managed and profit shared by a company. You make 50-60% of the money your work earns, so why do you have to put up with SQ's ridiculous strategies? You don't- enter wizzley.
I know the SQ site is a good earner but it's not like wizzley or hubpages in the sense that they expect you to wash the windows daily, change something often (or promote to draw traffic, when they have so much traffic it's ridiculous they only want to share with active lenses when lenses could activate in time being live...). I recall recently reading a post by someone in this forum (but not on this forum), asking all her fans to visit her lenses because they are reaching that benchmark where they get deindexed- it's a fools erand trying to keep up with that site- the idea is this is supposed to be simple, write, monetize, earn- not write, wait, wait, wait, find out your chit was taken down.
You have to write about only what's popular (or spend all your time in promo i.e. article marketing, fb likes, whatever cause no traffic and they drop your article like a bad habit), and you have to be at a certain "rank" or they pull all your hard work off the search engines... (they even delete lenses without warning, you just go there and they sent you a mail AFTER it's deleted so you can't back it up, and we're supposed to trust them with our hard work, our time?).
HP and SQ and others at least allow your work to stay live if it's written well (they unpublish something but give you 30 days to move it/back it up), and useful information, not rehashed etc... in my experience (only 5-6 years granted but I've earned hundreds per article a few times and consolidated over 2k a month on some accounts- wizzley is just getting started but in 2 years it will be one of my bigger passive incomes but I won't have to spend too much time, time I want to use to create new wizzles, maintainging what 300 articles? SQ makes me scared to publish, if you think 10-20-100 lenses is hard to keep up try 200,300,400- 2,000? It's rediculous.
In this industry I've seen hubs sit for 3 years and one day just start blowing up with traffic, earnings over 300.00 by itself, and more but they do have to sit there LIVE to reach that. I also never promoted it, never sent people to it, it just one day got a boost in traffic. I later found out it was a few major sites on the niche that was sending traffic... but had it not been live none of the thousands I earned from it would have happened. I earned for over 2 years at that rate until I was banished like thousands of other dedicated/loyal writers from a certain site :) (HP not SQ).
I think it's ridiculous that they do this (don't get me started on earnings formatting and the severe unfairness of their model). If their model was good I'd assume the wizzley proprietors would have followed suit, hell even hubpages thought it was unfair thus they created the same format we have (then later changed it to match squidoo in some respects; slowly tearing down the transparency until your getting paid through them.).
Now all that said (in frustration lol), I think SQ is a good site for earning IF you want to put in the ridiculous amount of time "maintaining" or rather keeping fixing what's not broken, what just needs some seasoning (time live). My 200 articles are all deindexed (and I quickly backed them up) and they are not poorly written, spammy, or anything I couldn't put here... yet I let the account go for a year and now my entire suit of articles are in the red... I think this is unreasonable for an internet 2.0 pioneer... I think they do it to have god control over quality and I have to give it to them, they got that- google loves them- nuff said. So it's good for them, good for those that bleed at the finger tips keeping up, and good for google, but anyone else? pssst.
I could say 50% bad things and 50% good things about SQ but overall it's very uncomfortable writing there because I don't know if my article will vanish, deindex, or if I'll even get paid for clicks that came from my pages- that's very unsettling... at wizzley at least we have security of being at home- you know nothing will happen to your work, unless of course your stupid enough to post spam or write spam or anything else not allowed.
I was on the fence until last month as to weather or not I wanted to move away from or just push a lot of energy into it and seeing what happens... I decided to ditch SQ, when I posted an article there that barely went 3 weeks before being deindexed I was done. My time obviously doesn't matter to them or they wouldn't waste it so frivolously.
Wizzley feels more like a democracy. SQ feels like a communist state. But that's just my views...