AndrewTalk - How Not To Do a Blog
written by John Chow
What Was He Thinking?
Sometimes I wonder what goes through the mind of a blogger when he orders a ReviewMe review from John Chow dot Com. Take for example the case of AndrewTalk. This is a blog about online business. It is presumably own by someone name Andrew. AndrewTalk is a good example on how not to do a blog. After reading this, you’ll understand why and you’ll also wonder what Andrew was thinking by order this review.
Who Is AndrewTalk?
Who is AndrewTalk? Your guess is as good as mine. The blog has no about page and the posts have no author links. The only message Andrew left me in the review request was:
This is a brand new blog about internet business. Encourage your visitors to keep visiting my blog because they will get good posts every day.
I had to do a WhoIs to find out that the owner’s name was Andrei Raileanu and had to go all the way back to the blog’s first post to find any information about him and even then it didn’t offer much except to say Andrew is a 21 year old from Eastern-Europe and the owner of Dev3, a web design and programming company.
If you are going to create a “make money online” blog, branding is everything. What makes you an authority on the subject? You can’t create a brand when readers don’t even know your full name.
Using Stolen Content Is Not The Way To Build a Blog
It took me a few minutes to figure out why all the posts on AndrewTalk had no author links. As far as I can tell, nearly all the posts were stolen from other blogs, including mine! On August 10th, AndewTalk posted Check out 5 Requirements For Investing In A New Business. It’s a copy and paste of My Five Requirements For Investing In A New Business. Then there is this post which is a copy and paste of Make $100 With A Citibank Saving Account
Andrew puts the disclaimer “This post was inspired from JhonChow.com.” on the two posts he took from my blog. Not only did Andrew misspelled my name but the correct disclaimer should be, “This post was stolen from JohnChow.com.” Andrew didn’t put any disclaimer on the other posts he stole. I recommend you check his blog to see if he ripped any posts from you. From doing a Google quote search, I can see that Andrew ripped a bunch of the posts from Search Engine Optimization Journal. Other posts looks to be taken from free article services but the resource box was removed.
The only original posts on AndrewTalk is his first post and the post asking readers to suggest a topic for him to write about. I suggest, “How to make yourself look like a fool by paying $400 for a review from a blog that you stole content from.”
This Is Not 1999
If Andrew really owns a web design and programming company then surely he must have an understanding of copyright laws. Furthermore, you would think he would also know that white text on a black background went out of style in 1999. The blog violates every design rules you can think of. Where is the home page link?
I really don’t know what Andrew was thinking when he ordered this review, but since he did, I recommend he remove all stolen articles from his blog or the $400 he paid for this review will seem like peanuts once the owners of those websites he stole content from gets done with him.
Guy creates a blog with stolen content and then orders a review from a blog that he stole content from. Try and figure that one out.
Find out what I am doing right now by following me on Twitter! If you like this post then please consider subscribing to my full feed RSS. You can also subscribe by Email and have new posts sent directly to your inbox.
Make Money Online with John Chow's Ad Network - Join TTZ Media Now!











(34 votes, average: 4.29 out of 5)
Here's A Few More Related Posts
PWND!!
LOL! This is funnier than when what’s-his-name ordered a review and got torn a new one.
You’re referring to Michael Nivola LOL
hey. you still remember him ?
It appears AndrewTalk is back up and running.
I just searched Michael Nivola in John chow’s search box and found his ReviewMe post. Also hilarious.hahaha. Much more hilarious was he commented on John’s post while sourgraping.hahahaha
This is just sad… some people really don’t get it. Like at all…
It is not about to get something or not…it is just about USING your brain. I mean, you know you don’t have a quality blog, you know you have stolen content from JohnChow.com why in the earth you to spend $400 blog review on the site of which you stole content from, it is more than certain that the review will be negative. And a negative review you could of get by just writing an anonymous e-mail to John and tickling him about the guy that has stole his content and things like that, that way most probably John would take some time to write about that, mention his blog…and he would still save the damn $400 bucks and invest them elsewhere…
My next question is, were the $400 legit with which John got paid?
What a slamming! I think I might contact him and offer him a review on cashquests.com! He’s obviously got too much money to throw around!
no. he’s doing a great job actually. it’s so clever. what do you think? creating a dummy blog, then order a reviewme to jc.com then don’t pay it. then redirect all the traffic to the new other dummy blog.
The only problem with that plan is all ReviewMe reviews are prepaid with no refunds.
Unless it was paid for by stolen Credit Card.
what a strange twist of events. and a waste of money..
Hahaha… clever thinking.
This guy has obviously got a lot of traffic quickly, regardless of why people are going there.
He needs to get rid of the under construction sign and spend all night making some quality, original, posts.
If you can find a contact on his blog then your a more observant person than I.
My thoughts exactly!
Wow. I’d like to see the response by “Andrew” to this review. Very funny.
HAHA indeed
Hehe, it’s great that Review Me doesn’t require positive reviews.
If you told me it was a joke I will trust you but it is a true story that so pathetic.
gotcha!
I must say that this is the best reviewme i have seen
that had to be the funniest ReviewMe i’ve read yet!
most definately without a doubt. i was ROFLMAO
When are people going to learn that you don’t order a review just because you are hoping to generate traffic, you order one for that reason plus a critique of your blog and areas of improvements. At least thats what I see it as when I do reviews. If you have something to hide, don’t order a reviewMe…especially from the Root of all Evil!
Exactly if you want just traffic you order it per head from Google.
Wow… just wow. Best Reviewme review ever. I love the “inspired from” part. Its one thing to be inspired by another post, its totally something else to totally rip it off. Its either “Inspired By” or “Ripped From”… not “Inspired From”.
John, you are SO evil!!
Sounds like a nobody about to become a somebody though.
I’m looking forward to AndrewTalk’s response, once he recovers.
I have to agree
Have I missed this one yet? Just woke up
It means Andrew has a good manner. He gives your money back to you after stealing your content. Andrew, you are good boy, son…. LOL
Never saw it that way, very true but unlikely
Nice way of taking it.
So true, Andrew your a good man
Haha, there you go! Andrew is paying you a ‘licensing fee’ for the content with the review me
Yup $400 for Licensing Fee
That is hilarious!!!
Not only is this guy a thief but he is an unbelievably stupid one!!!
The irony here is - although this is probably one of the worst reviews John has ever done it is guaranteed to drive a whopping amount of traffic to AndrewTalk because people want to check out just how daft this bloke is.
What’s that thing about no such thing as bad publicity?? It may be true.
true, but the links are nofollowed so he won’t get any SEO benefit. Surely will get some traffic though.
I was going to ask if the links were a nofollow or not for this… wouldn’t want to pass an ounce of PR to his rip off site.
Oh well, after reading the review i am not sure i wanna follow the link and find out what else is on that blog…
It’s because he’s from Eastern Europe. They don’t have many property rights like they do in North America.
Easy $400. =)
His webdesign company is Dev3.ro, so I’d say that eastern european country is Romania (which is quite third world).
Romania isn’t that third world, and they do have some good designers
Since January this year, Romania has been a member of the Eurpoean Union, so its copyright laws, etc, will be pretty much the same as in the UK/France/etc.
Wow, we’re both named Bryce and we’re both in Australia. What city are you in?
Sorry Bruce, I don`t know you, you don`t know me.
But saying Romania is third world shows me what kinda geography and history you know .. Not to mention other sciences, like cybernetics (invented by romanians) - mean that things which give you now the chance to speak here …
Lemme tell you a secret everybody know, except you : dot ro domain is available to be bought as well as dot us. I can only hope you`ll understand what I want to say …
The facts are simple : The guy, romanian, american or whatever he is (as citizen), MUST PAY for his mistake(s). That is simple, clear and undeniable.
Romania is third world , Nicolae Ceauşescu , revolution of 1989 , not a member of the OECD ( Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development ) , etc …
Romanian did not invent cybernetics , but that’s not to say they where not big participant in it either.
Romania :
Globalization Index 2005, ranked 35 out of 62 countries.
Bertelsmann Transformation Index 2006, ranked 19th out of 119 countries.
World Competitiveness Yearbook 2006, ranked 57 out of 61 economies.
Annual worldwide press freedom index (2006), ranked 58 out of 168 countries.
Index of Economic Freedom, ranked 67 out of 157 countries.
Etc …
Third world is not bad , considering your history , it means your not fourth world or a developing country.
For a somebody not having the balls to print who you are, you prove to be very brave.
Romanian did not invent cybernetics , but that’s not to say they where not big participant in it either.
Ştefan Odobleja (1902 - 1978) was a Romanian scientist, one of the precursors of cybernetics. His major work, Psychologie consonantiste, first published in 1938 and 1939, in Paris, had established many of the major themes of cybernetics regarding cybernetics and systems thinking ten years before the work of Norbert Wiener was published (1948).
I think you should reconsider everythink you think you know. You`ll be surprised that 99% of what you think now is actually wrong, bad, mistaken.
Ive been around the world twice and have done much of eastern Europe. Anything ex-russian is freaking scary.
Even a place like Germany which I would call first world has its ex-russian East Berlin. The difference between the americanized west Berlin and russian east Berlin is a big one. Even today with the wall down if you walk from one to the other, you know you’ve crossed where the wall was. It suddenly gets really scary.
“For a somebody not having the balls to print who you are, you prove to be very brave.”
My name and my e-mail are written in the required field , John as decided to not show them , for some reason. No need to be brave to disagree with someone like you , by that I mean someone insecure , nothing more , who is wrong.
“Ştefan Odobleja … was published (1948).”
Like I said , Romania and Ştefan Odobleja did not invent cybernetics , because I knew what your false information and false reference was.
The Roots of Cybernetic theory
The word cybernetics (’cybernétique’) was first used in the context of “the study of self-governance” by Plato in The Laws to signify the governance of people. The words govern and governor are related to the same Greek root through the Latin cognates gubernare and gubernator. It was also used in 1834 by the physicist André-Marie Ampère (1775–1836) to denote the sciences of government in his classification system of human knowledge.
The first artificial automatic regulatory system, a water clock, was invented by the mechanician Ktesibios. In his water clocks, water flowed from a source such as a holding tank in to a reservoir, then from the reservoir to the mechanisms of the clock. Ktesibios’s device used a cone shaped float to monitor the level of the water in it’s reservoir and adjust the rate of flow of the water accordingly to maintain a constant level of water in the reservoir, so that it neither overflowed nor was allowed to run dry. This is the first artificial truely automatic self-regulatory device that required no outside intervention between the feedback and the controls of the mechanism. Although they did not refer to this concept by the name of Cybernetics (they considered it a field of engineering) Ktesibios and others such as Heron and Su Song are considered to be some of the first to study cybernetic principles.
The study of teleological mechanisms (from the Greek τέλος or telos for end, goal, or purpose) in machines with corrective feedback dates from as far back as the late 1700s when James Watt’s steam engine was equipped with a governor, a centripetal feedback valve for controlling the speed of the engine. In 1868 James Clerk Maxwell published a theoretical article on governors, one of the first to discuss and refine the principals of self-regulating devices.
I don’t need to reconsider anything at all , you offered no new information , you where lied to , by your own government and teachers , you consider your education to be exact , when the proof is in the details you where unaware of even existed.
Since I was educated properly and I consider my word here , I wont suggest that you reconsider everything you know , just that you know that your education
and teaching in this mater are incorrect , the worldwide recognized answers is more complete ,you are incorrect by major omissions and by propaganda and political lies.
The mater is completely close for me , I said what I had to say , if you can get the worldwide recognized cybernetics body to agree with you , then I will agree with you , but they won’t , so I don’t.
Out of curiousity, Valentin and the Anonymous guy. Where are you guys from? Im assuming one of you is from east europe because its getting pretty emotionally involved.
I am not a Romanian, but have lot of Romanian Colleagues ( i work in a “western” European country). Its a pity that for Americans, anything non-american or non-british is third world. Yes Romania is not so well-off, but that doesn’t make it third world. Looking at the way the dollar is sliding down, America might soon lose its ground!
“Its a pity that for Americans”
Third world , and world fragmentation /was an European creation. The term was coined in 1952 by French demographer Alfred Sauvy to refer to what are now called developing countries. The definition as changed this days to include fourth world and fifth world and developing countries. It’s as much an economical qualification then a economy and commerce and currency exchange qualification this days
“Yes Romania is not so well-off, but that doesn’t make it third world.”
not so well-off = third world.
- First world are G8 country.
- Second world are well off