<<Step1>> {{url}} <<Step2>> Write a link-exchange outreach email on behalf of {{your name}} from {{your company}}, politely ask for a backlink to {{your website url}}. Use the received parts to find 2 quick reasons why the link exchange could make sense and tell the recipient of the email why you like their content by giving exact examples what you like from the context. Politely include in the email that you are open for a financial compensation in exchange for the placement of the link. Write a maximum of 200 words and write in a warm, personal and friendly way.

<<Step1>> {{url}} <<Step2>> GOAL = {{What is your goal}} Having the goal in mind, write a short, but attention grabbing pitch about the received parts to {{reporter name or publication}}.

Context: Partner information: INFER FROM SITE DOMAIN Partner Email: {{Email of outreach target}} Partner site domain: {{Link to outreach target}} Partner name: INFER FROM SITE DOMAIN Our product: {{Describe your business}} Our goal: {{What is your desired outcome of the outreach}} Product link: {{Link to your website}} Product features: {{Benefit of your own product or service}} My Name: {{Your name}} My Role: {{Your role}} You are a cold email wizard and you are going to write a cold email to a university. Follow the exact steps below. Identify the university name from the Partner Site Link or the Partner Site content provided in the "Context" section. Do not use the Partner Email to determine the university name. Gather relevant information about the university, such as its sports teams and location, as well as any details mentioned in the partner site content. This information will be used to personalize the email. Review the "Context" section to understand the objective of the email. Compose the outreach email following the guidelines below. Create three follow-up emails according to the given rules and suggestions. Email Guidelines: Avoid generic greetings like "Hey there." Always personalize the initial greeting with the university name. Remove all placeholders from the email. Ensure that everything in the email is final text. Use HTML format for all emails, including paragraph tags (<p>) for better formatting. Personalize the email using the contact information provided, known information about the university, and the partner site content. Mention the university name in the email. Include the Partner Site link when referring to their content. Use the exact link provided in the "Context" section. Add a link to our scholarship and explain that the requirements and application details are available there. Include a relevant link to our product within the email. Aim for an initial email word count below 180 and a follow-up word count below 70. Personalize the email with references to the sports team, location landmarks, or any other relevant information. Craft a subject line that grabs attention, is specific to the recipient and their content, and not easily faked. Start the email with a strong relational anchor. Present a compelling benefit for the partner to encourage them to engage further. Use bullet points if necessary for clarity. Conclude the email with a clear and easy ask, such as "Are you interested?". Maintain an extra line break between each paragraph for improved readability. If space permits, briefly mention the main features of our product and highlight the benefits for students. Follow-up Emails: Follow-up 1: The goal is to gently remind the recipient to respond without being pushy or annoying. Consider using a casual message like, "Just bumping this to the top of your inbox. :)" Follow-up 2: The goal is to create urgency and remind the recipient of the benefits for them. Include a reminder of your ask. For example, "Hey FIRSTNAME, Just wanted to follow up one last time. I would love to help you [INSERT WIN FOR THEM] (if that is a top priority for you right now). [RESTATE YOUR CTA FROM PITCH]?" Follow-up 3: The goal of this email is to provide a final soft call-to-action (CTA) and gather feedback for future pitches. Consider a message like, "Hey FIRSTNAME, You obviously weren't interested in my offer. No worries at all. If you have 2 minutes, would you mind telling me why not? I'm constantly looking to improve and would love to learn from you."

Generate 10 attention-grabbing headlines for an article about {{your topic}}

<<Step1>> Context = Extract the 9 main topics and keywords as a comma separated list from {{tab}} <<Step2>> I want you to act as an expert chatbot called "BeBetter", which is based on the GPT-4 model and designed to self-reflect on the SUBJECT and improve its responses. BeBetter is an expert in these fields: 1. Machine Learning 2. Natural Language Processing 3. Artificial Intelligence 4. Computer Vision 5. Robotics 6. Neural Networks 7. Data Science 8. Deep Learning 9. Data Mining 10. Algorithm Design 11. Cloud Computing 12. Web Development 13. Mobile App Development 15. Cyber Security 16. Blockchain 17. Augmented Reality 18. Virtual Reality 19. User Interface Design 20. Game Development BeBetter has the following built-in process: 1. You provide the initial response with an assumed score of 1. 2. BeBetter will critically analyze the response and explain why the response could be better. 3. BeBetter will rewrite the response to address the criticisms and improve the score. 4. BeBetter will continue iterating through steps 2-3, with each iteration improving the score by 1 or 2 points, until the score reaches 10 or a minimum of 5 iterations have been completed. 5. If BeBetter feels the final iteration could still be improved upon, regardless of the score, it will acknowledge the need for further work. Here is a layout example for each iteration: Iteration: # SUBJECT: text Score: value Criticisms: text Here is the initial response (Iteration 1) with an assumed score of 1, and BetterGPT will begin the self-improvement loop by generating its own criticism and subsequent iterations: SUBJECT = "{{Enter a text that you want ChatGPT to iteratively improve}}"

CONTENT = {{tab}} Self-assess your content for quality and people-first approach Evaluating your own content against these questions will help you determine if the content you're creating is helpful, reliable, and aligned with a people-first approach. It is also advisable to seek honest assessments from individuals you trust, who are unaffiliated with your site. Content and quality assessment: Is the content original, providing information, reporting, research, or analysis? Does the content offer a substantial, complete, and comprehensive description of the topic? Does the content provide insightful analysis or interesting information beyond the obvious? If the content draws on other sources, does it add substantial additional value and originality instead of simply copying or rewriting those sources? Does the main heading or page title offer a descriptive and helpful summary of the content? Does the main heading or page title avoid exaggeration or shocking language? Is this the type of page you would bookmark, share with a friend, or recommend? Would you expect to find this content in or referenced by a printed magazine, encyclopedia, or book? Does the content provide substantial value when compared to other pages in search results? Expertise assessment: Does the content present information in a way that fosters trust, such as clear sourcing, evidence of expertise, and background information about the author or publishing site (e.g., links to an author page or an About page)? If someone researched the site producing the content, would they perceive it as well-trusted or widely recognized as an authority on the topic? Is the content written by an expert or enthusiast who demonstrably possesses knowledge about the topic? Does the content contain any easily-verified factual errors? Presentation and production assessment: Does the content have any spelling or stylistic issues? Is the content well-produced, free from sloppiness or hastiness? Is the content overly mass-produced, outsourced to numerous creators, or spread across a large network of sites, leading to a lack of attention and care for individual pages or sites? Does the content have an excessive number of ads that distract from the main content? Does the content display well on mobile devices? People-first content evaluation: To evaluate if you're creating people-first content, answer "yes" to the following questions: Do you have an existing or intended audience for your business or site that would find the content useful if they came directly to you? Does your content clearly demonstrate first-hand expertise and in-depth knowledge, such as from using a product, experiencing a service, or visiting a place? Does your site have a primary purpose or focus? After reading your content, would someone feel they have learned enough about the topic to help achieve their goal? Will someone reading your content leave with a satisfying experience? Avoid creating search engine-first content: To ensure your success with Google Search, focus on creating people-first content instead of search engine-first content. Consider the following warning signs and reevaluate your content creation if you answer "yes" to any of them: Is the content primarily designed to attract visits from search engines? Are you producing a large volume of content on various topics in the hope that some of it will perform well in search results? Are you extensively using automation to generate content on multiple topics? Are you primarily summarizing what others have said without adding substantial value? Are you writing about trending topics solely for the purpose of gaining search traffic, without considering your existing audience's interests? Does your content leave readers feeling the need to search again for better information from other sources? Are you targeting a niche topic without having real expertise, solely relying on the expectation of gaining search traffic? Does your content promise to answer a question that currently has no answer, such as suggesting a release date for a product, movie, or TV show when it has not been confirmed? Understanding SEO and E-A-T: While search engine optimization (SEO) can assist search engines in discovering and understanding your content better, it is essential to apply SEO to people-first content rather than search engine-first content. For best practices in SEO, refer to Google's own SEO guide. Familiarize yourself with E-A-T and quality rater guidelines: Google's automated systems utilize various factors to rank content, with a focus on trust. Aspects of experience, expertise, authoritativeness, and trustworthiness, known as E-A-T, contribute to the assessment of content quality. Quality raters provide feedback on whether our algorithms deliver satisfactory results, particularly regarding E-A-T. Reviewing the search quality rater guidelines can help you assess your content's alignment with E-A-T and better understand the signals that influence Google's automated ranking systems. Evaluate your content using "Who, How, and Why": Consider the following questions to evaluate your content and align with the rewarding factors our systems seek: Who (created the content): Is it evident to your visitors who authored the content? Do pages feature a byline when expected? Do bylines provide additional information about the author(s), including their background and areas of expertise? Have you included accurate authorship information, such as bylines, where readers would expect it? How (the content was created): Have you clearly explained how the content was produced, particularly in product reviews, including the number of tested products, test results, and the testing process with accompanying evidence? If automation was used to generate content, have you disclosed this to visitors and provided information on how automation or AI was used? Why (the content was created): Is your primary goal in creating content to provide help and utility to people directly visiting your site? Are you focused on creating content that is useful to your existing or intended audience? Are you aligned with the concepts of E-A-T by prioritizing content that genuinely benefits users rather than aiming solely to attract search engine visits? Have you avoided using automation or AI primarily to manipulate search rankings, which violates our spam policies?

As an expert in taxonomy creation, we need your assistance in developing a clear, high-level website taxonomy based on a provided list of topics. These topics represent diverse categories that need to be neatly organized in a hierarchical manner. Subject of website: {{subject}} Important Topics: {{GSC query data}} The topics are a list of topic ngrams and their scores. The scores are based on the number of times the query appears in the dataset and the overall user interest in the topic. Generally, higher scoring queries are more important to include as top-level categories. Please adhere to the following dash-prefix format for your output. The taxonomy should be structured, as an example, as follows: - Category - Subcategory - Sub-subcategory - Subcategory - Category - Subcategory - Sub-subcategory - Sub-sub-subcategory - Sub-subcategory In order to effectively accomplish this task, you MUST follow the following guidelines: Brands: The Important Topics may mention these specific brands '{{brands}}'. When creating your taxonomy, please omit these brand terms. For example, if a topic is 'adidas shoes' and 'adidas' is in the specified brands, the taxonomy should include 'shoes' but not 'adidas'. No Guessing: AVOID inventing or speculating any subcategory subjects that are not directly reflected in the provided Important Topics. Miscellaneous: Some Important Topics are outliers, are too vague, or are not relevant to the products and services offered by the company. Assign these topics to a top-level category called 'Miscellaneous' e.g. Miscellaneous > Dogs (where all topics are related to shoes). Depth of Taxonomy: The taxonomy should be no more than four levels deep (i.e., Category > Subcategory > Sub-subcategory > Sub-sub-subcategory). Accuracy: Consider carefully the top-level categories to ensure that they are broad enough to effectively hold key sub-category subjects. Readability: Ensure that category names are concise yet descriptive. Duplication: Try not to assign a subject to multiple categories unless the provided Important Topics indicate it belongs in both. Output: Only output the taxonomy. DO NOT include commentary. Please read the guidelines and examples closely prior to beginning and double-check your work before submitting. Start!