It doesn't help that their comments also have the same structure :-)

That's what I meant when I said "I sense a voting ring..."

This was an insightful comment. It's about time we take advantage of social platforms and synergy to better our platforms against predatory users. Publishers absolutely need to unlock their strategies and adapt to a framework more suited for modern global information warfare and social engineering trends. What I'd like to see, in my opinion, is a mechanism for identifying and purging spurious content with zero barriers to exit in an old-style curation mode of operation. Without that, I think most social networks will be doomed to repeat history.

/s because I mean really honestly

But none of that matters if the publishers can't make money off the distribution -- and most of these deals simply don't allow for that. Apple made some changes recently but it's still not enough, and considering that many B2B sites still can make very good money with direct sales, there's very little incentive to participate.

It's kind of like those sites who want journalists to write for them for "exposure" (or ask photogs to use their photos, or artists to use their art, etc. without paying)-- sure, maybe millions more eyeballs see your writing, but you're making nothing off of it and just hoping you'll get something down the road. Meanwhile, the smart writers are taking gigs that maybe only a few thousand will read but they will get paid reasonable rates (and sometimes very good money) every time.

Not to say that many B2B publishers won't participate, but it'll be at a smaller scale and, I think, always with an eye on the trade-offs, which, again, aren't so great right now.