Where is the opt-in to share information that users can use to block Sidewiki? I am aware of the info sharing opt-in for Google Analytics, but am under the impression that it applies only to GA.

Could you kindly link us to it?

Thanks for the informative post.

Best regards.
Bengo
.-= Bengo´s last blog ..Lil Nyet 338 | Negotiation =-.

I have already seen blogs that are not getting the benefits of comments left directly on them – but left in the sidewiki where you can not edit what someone has said. Aside from buying SSL (doesn’t work with sidewiki) or coding your site to not work with the toolbar (will cause loss of traffic) the blocker is probably the best solution at this time.

I hope you are right and this doesn’t take off, but unfortunately G has applied for the trademark already meaning they are planning to carry on.
.-= Jill Carpenter´s last blog ..Sidewiki – Three Ways to Block it from your Website =-.

Knol was a big flop, I wonder why they even launched it. It is rotting now.

What if they decide to make it public by taking it off from the toolbar and launcing some sort of a trusted reviews portal?
.-= Ajay Kumar Singh´s last blog ..Bing goes Bingo!!! =-.

The thing is that the Sidewiki comments end up as Tweats, Facebook entries and blog feeds. These do end up in the main index, and pretty quickly too.

And with Google’s shift to ranking well what’s hot and new, these Sidewiki comments that get converted to other social media and blog posts will be right there on page one.

I believe Sidewiki is a concern for online reputation management. I hope I’m wrong, but I guess time will tell.

I do think you’re raising a larger question about online reputation implicitly: how exactly do we deal with branding in a medium where people are encouraged to speak their mind – no matter how little their mind contains – about others?

I think generally people online need to toughen up, get a thicker skin: just because one guy or even a group of people don’t get what you’re about, or even goes to the length of saying bad stuff about you is no cause for worry. There’s another principle, too, though, and some on the Internet know it but many don’t: it really helps everyone if people are forgiving in this age of incessant media. Yeah, there are hundreds and thousands of opportunities for all of us online to be misinterpreted or even indict ourselves: I know I’ve said stuff online I regret. There’s this criterion of being almost squeaky clean for professional purposes that is almost completely unrealistic, and while I think standards should be high, I suspect that old media and older marketing methods are actually driving a moralism online that makes it harder to do business and network here.
.-= ashok´s last blog ..On Socrates, Dancing and Philosophy: Xenophon, Symposium II 15-20 =-.

But let’s say it does take off. And let’s say that spammers want it to take off and really start to push it. Once they figure it out, Google Profiles will be created for the purpose of building up trust and then using them to direct clicks off popular sites.

I guess I’m having a hard time seeing the real value for users and especially webmasters, and I’m easily seeing the value to spammers and haters.

This move surprises me. If it takes off, it has real potential to be a major headache for internet professionals.
.-= Wemasters and marketers watch out´s last blog ..Time for WordPress theme standards? =-.

The worst part of all of this is that spammers will be using this tool to drive traffic away from websites or competitors will use this to write false negative reviews. The false reviews and information is what I think will be the largest problem as I really can’t see customers purchasing from a website where their sidebar wiki says it is a fraud or works terrible. This is why I have been using Bing more lately as not only the search is better but I can find what I am looking for quickly and not have to put up with Google monopolization.
.-= Brennan´s last blog ..How To Remove Your Home From Google Street View =-.