A Personal Financers Review Of SubvertAndProfit.com
I’m all for passive income and when I initially saw this website I thought it was a good idea, and I signed up. They promise decent money ($0.50 to $1.00 per SU review) for a fairly easy task. It makes sense (cents) for them and pumps up the site that is purchasing those thumbs.
However, the more I thought about it and the more I read about it, the more I thought it was immoral, and wasn’t worth my time…
The facts
I am a big StumbleUpon user and have 80% of my traffic coming from them. I love their service and I can’t begin to think of a reason that would undermine my time I’ve put in with both their standard service, and now their StumbleUpon Ads service. The more I read into the details, the less interested I was with them.
Right on their FAQ page, Subvert and Profit put a few choice questions:
Isn’t this illegal?
“No. Violating a website’s Terms of Use is not illegal. Digg or StumbleUpon can, however, delete your account if they discover that you violate their Terms of Use. We encourage you to violate any Terms of Use at your own risk.”
I’m pretty sure that them encouraging us to violate the Terms of Use means that they don’t care if we get our accounts deleted. They’re still turning a profit either way; with or without you.
They go on to say:
Won’t I get banned from Digg and StumbleUpon?
“We minimize the risk of your being banned…”
Gee, that sure is reassuring. I would like to see how they “minimize the risk”. My guess is they don’t do anything but SAY they minimize it. I don’t see how Digg or StumbleUpon would try to work with them at all for undemining the whole point of their respective services.
They don’t even claim identities on their FAQ:
Who are you?
“We are whomever you want us to be. We come from nowhere and we are everywhere…”
Well that isn’t very reassuring either. You’re not Batman and Robin. Sign me up for passive income, but I don’t like the sketchiness of it.
Other reviews
A post at Techipedia claimed that he knew of a person using Subvert and Profit to gain some exposure through Digg and found:
“It is possible that Digg is well aware of this and made it possible so that people trying to Subvert and Profit will not end up being able to successful when gaming the system…”
Furthering my idea that Digg and StumbleUpon aren’t dumb. They’re on to the tricks Subvert and Profit are dishing out.
Playing the devil’s advocate, if you had an account that you didn’t care about on SU or Digg, it might be worth it if you were that hard up for a few bucks. I can’t imagine you’d break the bank, but again, I’m sure both SU and Digg are on to that trick and try to eliminate those as fast as they can also. It’s a sneaky service, and must be profittable for them, so congrats on that I reckon.
Erica DeWolf seems to have a similar thought process as myself on this front:
“…despite my thoughts that this site is wrong, I must admit that its a brilliant idea, and it seems as if the creators have done a very good job covering up their tracks…”
Conclusion
I’ve had a few sites tossed my way so far, but haven’t Stumbled or Dugg any of them, nor do I plan to. I value my StumbleUpon traffic too much to flirt with possible termination. I’m always for snagging a few extra bucks to add to my net worth statement, but with any investment, you need to watch and research what you’re getting into before diving in head first…
Anyone else had issues/concerns with them?
Filed Under: Blog Improvement • Compensation • Frugal • Passive Income • financial education
