Adding a public web forum to a website is one of the best ways to easily acquire lots of targeted niche traffic. If you don’t have a decent amount of traffic (150+ visits/day) or a good sized list of emails (150+) don’t bother starting a forum. Nothing looks worse than an inactive forum. It is best to have around 500 leads and a $400 budget to start a forum. If you don’t have the traffic, or you can’t afford to buy the traffic required to start a web form, don’t spend the time setting one up.

What Forum Software Should I Use?

It is important to choose a software that will allow your forum community to grow. I have the most experience with Invision Power Board and I recommend using it in almost all situations.

If you can spare a few bucks, buy Invision Power Board(IPB) or vBulletin. They are both excellent web forum programs and in the end they will be worth the investment. Invision Power Board is more complicated to use, but it is full featured and more end user friendly. vBulletin is cheaper and easier to administer but offers less usability. Both vBulletin and IPB have excellent documentation and support.

PHPbb and Simple Machine Forums are both free solutions with excellent support. They don’t have all the features vBulletin and IPB have, but they are both easy to use and administer. While both of these forums are potential solutions, they tend to cause more problems than they are worth.

How Do I Jump Start My Web Forum?

Starting a web forum isn’t at all like building a website. Web forums need a lot of traffic in a short period of time in order to get started or else they flunk. Before releasing your forum to the public make sure everything is setup to perfection. Things can be changed later, but it is best if there aren’t any drastic changes during the release stage. Here are a few ways to help jump start your web forums.

1. Write articles and submit them to Article Directories. At the bottom of the article, mention the web forum. Continue to write at least one article a week. Do this before the opening day of the forum and continue to do it for a few months after the forum is open. Article submission will help boost your Google Page Rank and traffic will continue to trickle in to help maintain new user sign ups.

2. Format several very professional HTML messages to send out to your email list. I recommend having a list of at least 150 active relevant leads before starting a web forum. On opening day send a “Grand Opening” email to everybody on your list. Five to seven days later send another email to everybody on your list reminding them about the forum. Three weeks after that, remind them about the web forum again. Each time you send the reminder you will see an influx in forum activity. Its not necessarily important to send the messages out in that time frame just send the messages out as you see traffic die down on the forums. If your list contains over 500 leads, email 100 leads at a time every couple of days. Your leads will continually visit and post on the forums and you might not see a decrease in post activity if you email market correctly.

3. Create a “community newsletter” with a newsletter software like Aweber. There are a million newsletter softwares out there, but Awebers is definitely one of the better ones. If you are looking for a free solution open source solution, look at PHPList.

4. Setup a Google AdWords, AdBrite, Microsoft AdCenter and Yahoo Search Marketing accounts. Try to predict when user activity might decrease. Drive traffic to the forums on the day you predict the forum activity will simmer down. Definitely drive traffic on the first day the forums open.

5. Set the forum software to notify users when replies have been posted in threads they are active in. This is the most important tip. Often times people will post questions and forget to check back. If they are emailed when a response is posted, they are more likely to reply to their own post and then reply to another post.

6. Post articles on the forums in a locked section and email them to your list. Make sure the information in the article is high quality because the feelings associated with the article will also be associated with the forum. If the article is helpful, the user will come back to the forum in the future for help. When starting a forum, I normally post all my articles on a blog, a locked area of the forum and in Article Directories.

7. Create an off-topic forum. Allow general discussion in one forum or another. While this might not directly help drive relevant traffic to the website, it will help keep visitors active and entertained and in the end it will increase the relevant content.

8. Play devils advocate and ask questions. Web forums are known for creating debates. There isn’t a need to create a full fledged brawl, but try to create some sort of controversy. Politely try to point out multiple viewpoints on an issue and ask questions to spark user engagement. In the end, the discussion on the board is what will decide if it will take off.

Remember the Number One Rule: Forums are only good if they are active. An inactive web forum reflects negatively on your business.

You can see screenshots of the different forum softwares here:

[http://brendenwilson.com/2007/06/06/comprehensive-online-web-forum-guide.html]

For free Webinars and Articles visit http://BrendenWilson.com

Author: Brenden Wilson
Article Source: EzineArticles.com
Awe Inspiring Pictures

Tea party protesters turn extreme… conservatives go on rampage… the entire republican party are right-wing extremists!  Is it just me or is the media getting hysterical?  Knowing that a majority of news and media organizations are centered left, it does not surprise me when conservatives and republicans (not always the same) are negatively scrutinized with greater frequency in news media.  This is not your typical rant about the “liberal media” but rather an analysis of America as a whole.

America is a land of unique opportunity.  With so much going on in the news about politics and the availability to find answers to questions about political ethics and actions, every citizen has the opportunity to discuss politics on a regular basis. 

Fundamental to American society is the history of its’ revolution, rights, and religious freedom .  These foundational principles are part of all we do and discussing politics and religion is both complimentary and contentious. 

But was does this have to do with “right wing extremists” and the “left centered media”?  The debate today in American news and media and the people is over the fundamental principles.  The 3 R’s: Revolution, Rights, and Religious freedom.  These principles are determinant to every debate America has, but the nature of politics means that often we are going to come to a different conclusion.

The great challenge in discussing politics is the effort to be open minded and unoffensive.  You see there is a difference between agreeing with someone and trying to see their point.  When you agree with them you see their point of view as your own and it is fundamentally agreeing with your experiences and beliefs.  Seeing someone else’s point of view does not mean you have to agree with them though.

The problem in America is not that there are extremists or biased media sources, it is bound to happen because of the nature of humanity and our government.  The problem is with how we deal with these differences.

Understanding Others
Politics pose threats to any mild discussion because they are rooted deep within each individuals core identity.  Each person believes and understands things differently because of the way they were raised, educated, and experienced.  There unique identity comes from a mixture of experiences and personal preferences to form an ideological belief specific to each individual.  Within politics their also encompasses an ethical/moral belief system differing in every individual.  Thus the deeply personal nature of politics and why it is so divisive.

We must learn to understand others when trying to discuss politics and see events as they really are.  Because my experiences are unique to my own life, I see the world in a way that no other person on this earth can possibly have experienced.  This is because my previous experiences have formed my perspective uniquely to then experience new things.  So no two people are alike.  We must then learn to see things the way others see them.  Again, we do not have to reach the same conclusion (agree), but we should see the reasons for why they reach their results.

Once we understand why they think and feel the way they do, we can then determine whether we agree with them.  Not before.  Close minded and rude people are those never seeing or understanding the other person’s perspective because they decided it was wrong before they began to listen.  This characteristic is not a plague to either party, media organization, or ideologue but rather to people as a whole.

With a proper understanding of the other viewpoint, agreeing or disagreeing with them actually strengthens our answers because we know the other views answer context of their reasoning.  Thus the more we listen the finer and more specific our own understanding is for why we are right.  We also can become more civil. 

Avoid being rude and listen to others to understand them.  Then make your analysis after you have added what they have to say into what you already know and experience.  You may not change your mind, that is okay, but at least you thought critically about why you believe or think the way you do.  You now know a little bit more of what you believe.

Then we wont worry about labels, names, slandering, or bias because we will become secure in our own understanding and knowledgeable about the others reasoning.  For every argument there is a reason, often founded in good reasons, why things should be the way the need to be.  Our priorities just might not be the same as theirs, and that’s okay!

Learn more about the Art and Science of Politics with Political Tutor. Discussing how to Become a Politician, understand the American Political System, and make a real difference in other peoples lives.

Author: Seth Waite
Article Source: EzineArticles.com
Beading Necklace

So often we see political Blogs and Forums, which attack the Bush Administration, yet we allow this and say nothing. Some who are political adversaries or of the opposition party often join in, as it appears to be a rather trendy endeavor for them. Some may not realize that all this guerrilla style tactics takes a toll on our nation in the World Media and actually emboldens International Terrorists.

How unfortunate that any American would side with the enemy over the President of the United States of America who was duly elected by the people? Some observing this have said; What on Earth is the World Coming too? Interesting comment and indeed a question that needs to be answered and discussed.

You see anyone can purposefully misinterpret data, make up conspiracy theories or call into question another’s good name. Anyone can become part of the problem instead of the solution like this website has done. Anyone can slip into psychotic behavior condemning the greatest nation in the history of mankind.

And for all these nut cases out there; Why not put up your resume and all the great things you have done for mankind this week, before condemning another whose shoes you could never fill? That is what I am saying. Plus these negative Blog and Internet Forum posts and those bizarre conspiracy theory websites are generally a pack of lies anyway. And you either know or should have known this. Consider this in 2006.

“Lance Winslow” – Online Think Tank forum board. If you have innovative thoughts and unique perspectives, come think with Lance; www.WorldThinkTank.net/. Lance is an online writer in retirement.

Author: Lance Winslow
Article Source: EzineArticles.com
Canada duty tariff

From President Obama to the least popular host on MSNBC or progressive talk radio, the American political left cannot find anything to dislike in the Muslim religion. At least, if they do, they are not telling.

Considering Islam’s bad record on human rights (see Sudan) on women’s rights (see Afghanistan/Pakistan), its belief in a real God, its belief in a holy scripture, its history of 1,400 years of warfare, conquest, forced conversions, persecution of minorities; you’d think, the political left would loath the sound of the call to prayer or the sight of a minaret, like they do the Christian cross and the memory of Jerry Falwell.

What is it that the American left sees in Islam that makes them defend it with the passion of a convert to the Charismatic Catholic Renewal? Explanations todate range from the argument from cowardice: namely, that the left is afraid to criticize Islam because they fear becoming an intentional target of a suicide bomber; to the explanation from Machiavelli, that the left wants to use Islam as a foil against Christianity and Judaism to destroy Christian/Jewish power in America. Of course, the addendum on this argument is, because of the secular left’s antipathy to religion, that after their gambit works, they will turn on Islam, and so completely remove the influence of faith from American life.

As inventive as those answers are, I don’t see the left composed of a bunch of cowards afraid to criticize anyone or anything. I also disagree that the left would play the dangerous political game of elevating Islam and then turning on it, knowing that the very first purges of society made by an empowered Islam would be against those left-wing members of society.

The most satisfying answer that no one has yet offered is foundby looking at the kind of salvation offered by each of the great monotheistic religions, Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, and, of course, Secularism.

Salvation in Judaism

In Judaism, the salvation offered is national. We can prove that by reference to the Hebrew scriptures where it is recorded that the nation was offered a relationship with God. In Judaism, the actions of a single person can bring disaster on the nation; whereas, the righteousness of the nation is required for blessing. One’s individual relationship with God in some contexts is constrained by the Jewish nation’s relationship with God.

Salvation in Christianity

In Christianity, the salvation offered is personal. One’s ethnicity or national origin are facts that do not impede or aid one’s personal relationship to God. One is born Jewish, but all Christians are supposed to be converts. Even if your parents were Christians, that heritage does not automatically make you a Christian, at least not in the sense described in the New Testament. Christianity, with its emphasis on individual and personal responsibility before God, has been called the perfect religion for a capitalistic society.

Salvation in Islam

In Islam, the salvation offered is social, not national, and not personal in the way Christianity is personal. One becomes a Muslim by reciting a Koranic exclamation. Everyone is Islam has exactly the same responsibility, the words of the prayers recited are expressed publicly, everyone prays at the same time toward the same geographic spot on the earth, making It social prayer. In Islam, the world-wide religious tax collected from every Muslim goes to provide for the poor.

Look at Islamic societies, like Egypt. Everyone dresses alike, everyone’s houses are similar, and everyone speaks the same thoughts (at least publicly). Deviations from socially acceptable speech are punishable by law with beatings and imprisonment. Except for the elite few, everyone lives a similar life, with a similar income. It is only in business thatcitizens have a hope of gainingmaterially something more than their neighbors.

Political/Social Salvation

The social salvation offered by Islam is the reason the American political left so “loves” this one monotheistic religion and despises the others. The saying goes, “two cannot walk together unless they be agreed.” The American political left agrees with most of Islam’s goals and with many of their methods. A world under the control of the American left would look very much like a world under Islamic control. Social salvation (peace) is imposed because every member of society must look like, act like, and think like every other member.

For non-leftists, especially the right-wing commentators, the actions of the political left often seem perplexing and inconsistent. That is because non-leftists usually view political actions from the 30,000 foot level of the nation-state. Even the 50,000 foot multi-nation view of leftist’s actions doesn’t seem to account for all thepolitical positionsleftists take in American society. This is because the American left’s actions are driven from the high orbit of a world-viewing satellite. This view from space is primarily a moral view which gives the discourse of the secular leftits religious quality and air of moral superiority.

If one believes that no human being should have to choose between satisfying their hunger or their thirst, but not both at the same time, the view from orbit makes sense. From orbit, with the entire world illuminated against the blackness of space, earthly resources are limited. Some human beings have a miserable life because their economics are primative: if they have a drink of water, they cannot have a mid-day meal, if one family member gets a new shirt, the rest must go without shoes.

Other people can go to the richest city on earth, take a penthouse suite in the most expensive hotel, and live there for years without thoseexpenses in any way diminishing their personal wealth. Others can choose between the kinds of luxuries they enjoy, even though they cannot afford everything. Othersmust choose between wants, but have all their needs satisfied. Not so with many people throughout the world who must choose between basic human needs, and so suffer.

What the Left Believes

To the left, looking at today’s default distribution of world resources, the inequalities seems to provide another reason for not believing in a good God. If they (the left) could re-distribute resources so every single human being had at least their basic material needs met (water, food, shelter, clothing, employment), those who accomplished this redistribution would be the gods of this newworld order. It’s a high moral view, one that cares about human suffering and finds no technical reason that economic discrepancies between societies should continue.

Convergence of Islam and the Left

Islam believes if all humanity submits to Mohammed’s revelation, then there will be peace. Islam proclaims that until all the world submits, peace for any in non-Islamic society will not be allowed. Furthermore, Islamic societies are driven by top-down, non-democratic means. The elites make the social decisions, for everyone else those decisions amount tothe will of God. The political left loves this kind of societal organization because only in this way can their goals be achieved.

The American left is uncritical of Islamic societies not because they don’t privately opposes Islamic religious ideas, but because Islam and the left both offer a human, social salvation. Islam imposes their salvation in the name of God. The American left would impose their social salvation in the name of the moral goal of eliminating needs-based human suffering. For the political left to criticize Islamwould be to criticize themselves, something those with a high, external,moral purpose will not do.

This explains why Christianity, because of its emphasis on the personal and individual, cannot be tolerated and must be rebuked or marginalized at every opportunity. A Christian society, includingeven a degenerate western society originally based upon Christian ideas, is an enemy of both Islam and secular political thought. The elimination of human suffering caused by the inequitable distribution of resources is a goal that rises above the prosperity of a single nation orthe possible achievements of any single member of those societies. An all powerful God could have designed a better system, but because He didn’t, the left will rise to the challenge and do the work He should have done, but certainlyonlyin their own name, not in His.

It is true that achieving the end of human needs-based suffering is technically possible. That possibility makes it a moral imperative. It is such a lofty moral goal, that should a portion of the human race suffer in other ways from this necessary re-organization, so be it. At least, that is the perspective the left offers. Understanding this connection between Islamic and leftist political salvations explains everything. The left is often accused of condescending, arrogance, and elitism. But if your religion offered a salvation that could bring the world and all of humankind political and social peace, while your opponents followed the teachings of a God who couldn’t accomplish what you can, how else could you feel?

The citizens of any country cannot be allowed to think as individuals who are responsible to God first and only secondarily and tangentially responsible to government. National citizens must become world citizens and this means individuals in a society must think as a group, part of a world society in which every culture shares equally. In Islam this is God’s will for the world and so it is a salvation that must be imposed. So it also is for the true believers on the American political left. Their will, their high moral purpose, must also be imposed.

http://www.amazon.com/Time-of-the-Heathen/dp/B002TG4NTW/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1257447160&sr=1-2

Author: James Matteson
Article Source: EzineArticles.com
Canada duty rate