"5 Easy SEO Tips to Optimize a Website"

Posted by Edward Lewis, aka pageoneresults™
SEO Consultants Directory System Administrator
Orange County, California | United States

Basic Sphinning Sphiraling out of Control

This is the topic that set the stage for my quick demise at Sphinn. It all started with me wanting to know a bit more information about the video being posted before I offered a Sphinn. I wanted to get confirmation on what I saw in writing and heard in the video.

This is also the same topic that keeps getting referenced in regards to me making threats and/or being rude, crude, obnoxious, being an a*s, on meds, being a d*ck, you name it. I took it like a man too. I dig it when people start calling me names, I really do. Feed me Seymour!

I won't bore you with any of the details this time as the below should keep you busy for the next hour or so. It is interesting to say the least. This is the entire discussion edited for typos only and swear words...

5 Easy SEO Tips to Optimize a Website
Went Hot: July 16, 2008 - 11:12 am
Posted By: dsnyder 1 day 8 minutes ago
Topic Type: News Story (Jump to http://www.searchmarketinggurus.com) my network
Category: SEO

Video and Post from Li Evans on 5 Easy SEO tips to optimize a website, great quick reference for beginners.

Comments

from pageoneresults 23 hours ago

Before I just arbitrarily Sphinn this like everyone else appears to be doing, I just want to say Li, you go girl!

But, there is a bit of misinformation in that article and the video. That's why I'm wondering if those who Sphunn this actually read and/or watched the YouTube video. You tried girl but there are some bits and pieces that were incorrect and I have to wonder if you are targeting the right audience here. Is this the type of stuff ya'll want to see? If so, man, I can crank out videos all day long and feed your Sphinn sickness if that is what you want.

Also, if you are going to do a tutorial video such as that, be sure to use the proper nomenclature for the areas you are discussing, it might lend a little more credibility to the presentation but with the other misinformation, that would be tough.

I'll wait before I Sphinn. I'd like to see just how many jump on the Sphinn button without really investigating what they are voting for.

from eKstreme 21 hours ago

So which bit is upsetting you? It would be interesting to have that discussion because it may be that you misunderstood something in the article or you didn't know something that Li does and actually you're the one who's wrong.

from pageoneresults 21 hours ago

Yes, I could have misunderstood something in the article but I don't think that is the case. I've managed to keep my senses even after visiting 500+ of the various resources being posted here at Sphinn.

"So which bit is upsetting you?"

I can't say that I was upset and I don't see mention of that term in my Comment. I'd be upset if someone I were training picked up that video and decided to use it as a starting point for their "self-improvement" ventures. I'd give them a Mark Harmon real quick. :)

"It would be interesting to have that discussion because it may be that you misunderstood something in the article or you didn't know something that Li does and actually you're the one who's wrong."

You know, I have definitely been wrong before and I surely expect to be wrong again. But, someone needs to prove me wrong before I learn. The items being discussed in the video are before the basics these days, they really are. And then to name them incorrectly and state that the meta description has no value for the search engines is blatant misinformation to say the least.

Could it be that you are wrong? Did you watch the video? Did you come away with the feeling that something wasn't right? I did. Can I express that here in the Comments section? I mean, do you want me to jump on the Sphinn bandwagon and just Sphinn for the Phunn of it? Please do give me a little more credit than that. Don't take my "stand offish" attirude as a sign of being weak. I do watch the Dog Whisperer and know stuff... Phhhssshhh < You'll know that sound if you know Caesar, that dude rocks!

from Halfdeck 20 hours ago

Sphinning this to encourage more women in the SEO industry to do vids.

from pageoneresults 20 hours ago

Oh come on Halfdeck! We already have quite a few women who rock the industry. This one may be up and coming but they are not there yet.

I can see it now. The female population in our industry is now going to explode because you gave them some off the wall idea to start doing more vids. You know what that will do to our industry? It will tank overnight! There are too many guys minus the gal and you can be assured that they will be too busy arranging their Friends portfolios.

I wonder who the Fabio of SEO would be. Quick, change those profile icons, be sure to use your best Match.com pic. You want to make sure that you attract those Sphinners and bring them into your little Node. The ones producing the vids. The more you Sphinn them, the larger your list will grow. < Oops, I didn't mean that to sound...

from Halfdeck 19 hours ago

"Oh come on Halfdeck! We already have quite a few women who rock the industry."

I didn't say we didn't Pageone; I just said more videos would be cool. SEO is such a geeky industry it needs a facelift. Plus I'm tired of reading.

from eKstreme 18 hours ago

OK, let me try again because clearly you getting defensive is not the intended outcome I wanted from my question. And I don't think you're weak: I just want you to point out exactly what's wrong with the post and not say "Did you come away with the feeling that something wasn't right? I did." Tell me what that something that made you feel it wasn't right is.

So: Which bit in the article and video contain misinformation?

Pierre

from pageoneresults 18 hours ago

Ya see Pierre, you just proved one of my points. Some of you just don't read this stuff you are Sphinning and now by golly, commenting on. This must be a new concept for you yes?

"So: Which bit in the article and video contain misinformation?"

Dude? You're kidding me right? Where is that damn Mark Harmon when I need him? In fact, does he have a twin?

from eKstreme 18 hours ago

Here you go again making statements without backing them up. I read the post before I sphunn and before my first comment.

I'm just waiting for you to actually back up your words. Only then will I be happy to have a discussion with you about whether the post is right or wrong. Until you come up with a specific complaint or set of complaints, you're simply making unsubstantiated statements.

from pageoneresults 18 hours ago

eKstreme what is there to backup? We're talking about the meta description element and its value to both human and bot entities. You want some backup?

Oh crap! I lost the damn memo from Matt Cutts that said something to the effect that meta descriptions were common sense best practice and that yes, they are used to some extent in determining the quality of the destination. Let me see if I can dig up some patent references for you to read while I go get some damn rest. Its been almost 24 hours playinng over here. My eyes hurt. I've worn the letters off on some parts of my Saitek Eclipse II keyboard which I thought was going to hold up at least for another month. :(

And, to top that off, can you believe I'm getting cranky?

from eKstreme 18 hours ago

Finally! How hard was it to point out exactly what you're talking about, namely the meta descrption? See, now we can talk about it instead of waving our hands in a fluffy way saying "something doesn't feel right". Saying things are off is not good SEO.

And I know about the story of meta descriptions and their uses. A good reference is http://googlewebmastercentral.blogspot.com/2007/11/anatomy-of-search-result.html from Matt Cutts. The way he describes the meta description is about the user. I can't dig out the reference that says the meta description doesn't have much weight in the algo. That's consistent with what Li said.

What's your bone to pick?

from pageoneresults 17 hours ago

eKstreme I am at that 50/50 point where I'm wondering if my lack of sleep has blurred my judgment or...

Okay, I'll be nice. Or, you missed this part about eight (08) < count em' eight (08) replies back...

"You know, I have definitely been wrong before and I surely expect to be wrong again. But, someone needs to prove me wrong before I learn. The items being discussed in the video are before the basics these days, they really are. And then to name them incorrectly and state that the meta description has no value for the search engines is blatant misinformation to say the least."

What's my bone to pick? None really. If you keep up though, I might want to throw you a bone or two if you want to playy? Pssshhhttt. < Its that Ceaser guy, he rocks.

from DazzlinDonna 16 hours ago

Just to be clear...watched the video...read the words...sphunn it. I have no issues with the content.

Sure, it's just the very basics, but it's something I'd want to pass along to my newbie ebuzz coaching clients who are focusing on lots of things besides just seo.

from justfred 16 hours ago

pageone is just a nitpicky soapboxer, we get those alot in our industry. The vid is simple, but generally good advice. Not work my sphinn vote, but definitely worth my defense against attack from arrogant people who think they're right when they're just wasting whitespace!

what she said about the meta description is correct. or at least that's the resounding opinion I've never read to be opposed until today. Even if you're right, waving your arms around in protest is the wrong choice, you just look like an a*shole.

from eKstreme 16 hours ago

pageoneresults get some sleep... and a new keyboard. You need both apparently.

And next time you think you have something big and important to say, say up straight without dancing and pretending you know best. You're not better than any of us.

from DaveDavis 15 hours ago

The description holds no value in the algo fo search engines, that's been stated many many times since SEO's back in the old days use to game it. But it still holds value... in the way users see it and that's what's stated in the video.

from storyspinner 15 hours ago

Wow... all this stuff while I'm asleep.

Thanks Pierre, justfred, donn, Halfdeck, dave s and dave d .... and somewhat pageone.

pageone... while you started out complimenting me .... you should work a little on your "take downs". I really don't know really what the deal is, why you have a problem with what I've said. Matt's said on many occasions that the meta description holds no value in the algo. He's also stated on many occasions (as well as other Google reps at the conferences) that a good meta description is still good for the search engines, because of it displaying in the search results.

Yes, they highlight the keywords in the results, but it doesn't hold weight in the algo, so I really don't understand at all what was "wrong" or "misinformation" in what I stated.

I stated (pulled from the TRANSCRIPT emphasis mine) "The description does not have any kind of weight with the search engines and their algorithms. It does help the users who are using the search engines to gauge whether they want to click on what they are seeing in the search results or not."

Yeesh, I've been in this industry way to long when I see a person arguing about the value of meta description. ... I think I might go back to bed and start the day over.

Thanks Pierre for pointing to those links. And thanks Dave for sphinning this. I think this is the first video sphunn LOL :)

And no... I'm not gonna respond any further... onepage, if you have an issue, email me li@lianaevans.com., unfortunately I've got a ton of client work that has to get done, before I'm off to BlogHer in San Fran tomorrow.

from JulieJoyce 15 hours ago

I don't think that saying the meta description has no value for the engines is anything to get worked up about. Not everything we do in SEO is about the engines...there are cases when users are important and I think Li's video makes that quite clear. Thus Sphunn.

from SpostareDuro 10 hours ago

I Sphunn for the sheer fact that Li concerned herself with SEO basics.

cre8pc from cre8pc 10 hours ago

I took notes during the video and tried to locate where the information is incorrect.

1. Use unique title tags for each page - true
2. Meta desc - helpful for searchers and engines in understanding page topic; has no effect on actual algorithm - true
3. Links - be descriptive with anchor text; don't use "click here" when a better description with keywords will do - true
4. Images - they come in image searches in Google and Yahoo!; use alt attributes; label them properly - true
5. Header tags - use them; they indicate the weight and importance of page topic and when used with keywords, help to clarify for engines the page topic - true

The video is delivered in video format, as well as content format for accessbility.

Very nicely done Li!

from pageoneresults 9 hours ago

Unbelievable! This actually got Sphunn in the early morning hours and made it HOT! Wow, the power of friends eh?

"The description does not have any kind of weight with the search engines and their algorithms."

Bullsh*t! Tell that to all the folks who took that same stance a few years ago and decided not to use a meta description and/or used a weak one. Ask them what happened and if the search engines and their algos don't lend any weight to the meta description element.

Also, the correct name for the title tag is Title Element. Ya, I'm being nitpicky about it because there is another title attribute that confused by just about most of you probably in this topic. So, you have Title Elements and Title Attributes and I'm sure there are a few reading this wondering, what the hell is he talking about. Just what I thought...

I tried watching the video again to "take notes". I just couldn't bring myself to do so. :(

from eKstreme 9 hours ago

pageoneresults (using divine intervention no doubt): Let me tell you something, and I'll be as clear as possible. As things stand, in July 2008, the meta description does not have much weight (effectively no weight) in the ranking algos. A few years ago it did have weight in the algo.

Some references to back up my statements:
1. Jill Whalen published test results in 2004: http://www.searchenginejournal.com/search-engines-and-the-meta-description-tag/953/ . Key quote: "I also recently discovered that when I tested a nonsense word in the Meta description tag of a page (with the word not appearing elsewhere on the page), Google did not find it. But when I added the word to the visible text copy on the page, Google would bring up the test page when the nonsense word was searched for. Not only that, but it displayed that part of the Meta description tag where the nonsense word appeared."

2. In Dec 2007, a Google employee, Susan_Moskwa, posted on WMW http://www.webmasterworld.com/google/3527699.htm the following: "it's still true that meta descriptions don't affect your ranking in search results"

3. In Sep 2007, from Google itself at http://googlewebmastercentral.blogspot.com/2007/09/improve-snippets-with-meta-description.html : "And it's worth noting that while accurate meta descriptions can improve clickthrough, they won't affect your ranking within search results"

As for title element vs tag vs attribute. You're nitpicking the wrong way. The title tag is correct language, just like there is a body tag and a head tag. A title attribute is correct for tags that allow title attributes like the anchor tag. A tag is an element.

So please, again, PLEASE, back up your statements when you make them. I call "Bullsh*t!" on your statements.

Pierre

Jill from Jill 8 hours ago

This will probably be deleted for the flame that it is, but P1R, you are an a*s.

from pageoneresults 8 hours ago

Again, this continues to prove my point. Ever hear of reading between the lines? And, how many times does Google go on record stating that something has relevance in their algorithm? Come on now, get real would ya? Don't let the whole "protect your friends" thing get in the way of what may be wrong.

"As things stand, in July 2008, the meta description does not have much weight (effectively no weight) in the ranking algos. A few years ago it did have weight in the algo."

Me thinks you are incorrect and "I do" have research to support otherwise. I won't expose it either. Google doesn't need to know my testing methods and neither do you. They know more about their algo than I do, that is for sure. I've seen the fallout that no meta descriptions and then poorly written meta descriptions can have. So, come back down to the basics and lets discuss in further detail and not some one liner stating that "the description does not have any kind of weight", that is blatantly incorrect no matter which way you Sphinn it!

"Some references to back up my statements:
1. Jill Whalen published test results in 2004:"

And your point is? Jill Whalen banned me from her forums a couple of years ago because she too was giving misinformation. And I'll be damned if someone within the Google upper echelon hasn't made statements confirming everything I proved in that one topic that got me banned. It was probably the most longest and verbose topic in their history over there. In fact, I know quite a few mods lost some sleep over it. ;)

"2. In Dec 2007, a Google employee, Susan_Moskwa, posted on WMW"
http://www.webmasterworld.com/google/3527699.htm the following: "it's still true that meta descriptions don't affect your ranking in search results"

Ya, and its true that paid links don't effect your rankings too.

"3. In Sep 2007, from Google itself at http://googlewebmastercentral.blogspot.com/2007/09/improve-snippets-with-meta-description.html : "And it's worth noting that while accurate meta descriptions can improve clickthrough, they won't affect your ranking within search results"

Its always worth noting that things will not affect your ranking. Its good that they keep that Sphinn intact. If they didn't then most of you would be stuffing the meta description elements with who knows what.

"As for title element vs tag vs attribute. You're nitpicking the wrong way. The title tag is correct language, just like there is a body tag and a head tag."

You're wrong and here is the "official" take on that...

7.4.2 The TITLE element
http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/struct/global.html#h-7.4.2

7.4.3 The title attribute
http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/struct/global.html#h-7.4.3

By the way, if you ever want answers to most of your SEO questions, you'll usually find the correct ones at the W3. It is the ultimate SEO Resource bar none. Don't rely on your friends who may have just started this stuff a year ago and now have become video pros and can capture your attention with all this mumbo jumbo.

"So please, again, PLEASE, back up your statements when you make them. I call "Bullsh*t!" on your statements."

I just did. And, in regards to the meta description, you might want to read the recent challenges for Webmasters regarding those...

WMT - Meta Descriptions too Short
http://www.webmasterworld.com/google/3692727.htm

Ya'll are just too damn phunny. You'll sit here all day long and find all the public references that someone makes regarding the meta description not having any value. Ever work with a site that had over a million pages of quality content and no meta descriptions? And then add them after a few years of not having them? Try it, tell me what happens to your bottom line.

We can also take this one step further. If you don't feel that they have any value in the algo, how about removing them from your pages? Yes, that would be the perfect test. Take away your meta descriptions since they do not have any kind of weight with the search engines. Come back and tell us how things turned out. Give it about a week or two.

Oh, Jill got one in while I was posting...

"This will probably be deleted for the flame that it is, but P1R, you are an a*s."

Actually I will ask the moderators to leave it, you are feeding my sickness. :)

Jill, let me ask, which side of your face am I talking with today, the left side or the right side? I've seen you flip over so many times that I won't even visit your forums anymore. I don't mind the flames, I can handle them. This Internet thing tends to give you gator skin after 13-14 years. After that topic at your forums a couple of years ago, I realized then just how Clueless you could be at times. Hey, don't take that too personally either, I can be Clueless too but not to the degree some have been exhibiting here.

from eKstreme 8 hours ago

p1r: Again, you are not backing up your statements. For example, you say:

"Take away your meta descriptions since they do not have any kind of weight with the search engines. Come back and tell us how things turned out. Give it about a week or two."

Who said that I don't do this on some of my sites? Traffic is just fine thank you very much. Actually, when I removed my description tags, my traffic skyrocketed. My theory about that is Google does a much better job at picking a snippet that's tailored to the query than me. See, if I enter a description tag, Google would feel like using it most of the time (as they state). If I gave them free reign, their snippet generating algo will do much better. It's been about a year now.

Again, I'm talking from experience, not from reading between the lines. People like you give our industry a bad name. Please stop and think next time you want to make a claim.

Now if you'll excuse me, I'm going to go feed myself, not a troll. I'm done here.

from MariosAlexandrou 8 hours ago

If we stop responding to P1R he'll go away.

from pageoneresults 8 hours ago

eKstreme, you are welcome to your opinions just as I. You are welcome to take this path, that is your choosing. I don't want to change your mind. Here, watch the video again to reaffirm everything you've said.

"p1r: Again, you are not backing up your statements. For example, you say:"

Me thinks you don't know what backup is.

"Who said that I don't do this on some of my sites?"

Who cares? That would be your loss, not mine or anyone elses. Oh wait, it would be a loss for those who would use this video as a starting point for "the basics", that is who loses.

"Traffic is just fine thank you very much. Actually, when I removed my description tags, my traffic skyrocketed."

Ya? It must have been the removal of them then that did it. Surely they were poorly written and removing them just showed how bad they were? Hey, I can be nasty too. If you keep "trolling" I'd be happy to opine. ;)

"My theory about that is Google does a much better job at picking a snippet that's tailored to the query than me."

Ya see, you are still learning. One day you'll be able to write a meta description element using the inverted pyramid approach and maybe do a better job than Google in generating a solid snippet with click appeal.

"See, if I enter a description tag, Google would feel like using it most of the time (as they state). If I gave them free reign, their snippet generating algo will do much better. It's been about a year now."

Go right ahead and give them free reign. Apparently the structure of your HTML allows for a clean indexing and doesn't impede quality snippet generation. This is not the case for most websites.

"Again, I'm talking from experience, not from reading between the lines."

No, you're talking from emotion, not experience. Please do use the correct terminology.

"People like you give our industry a bad name. Please stop and think next time you want to make a claim."

Really? Oh, that is way too phunny. If I can solicit these types of responses, I'm staying for a bit longer than Sunset today. I'll sit here all day long and tell you like it is. Feed me Seymour!

"Now if you'll excuse me, I'm going to go feed myself, not a troll. I'm done here."

You're excused.

"If we stop responding to P1R he'll go away."

No I won't, that will only make it worse! ;)

from DarkMatter 8 hours ago

I've never seen someone type so much yet say so little.

from pageoneresults 7 hours ago

DarkMatter, could it be a case of just not reading? I have a sneaky suspicion that is the challenge at hand.

Since I'm not part of the "Sphinn Friends Network", most of my Friends left when they saw what was happening, although I still have a few over here. Actually, I see all of you as my "Friends" as that has a totally different meaning in this environment. Virtual Friends are no phunn really. I could care less about a Sphinn if my Virtual Friends are not reading me and just Sphinning me because they like me.

Heck, I could come in through a proxy and sign up with another username, create this killer "sexy" icon and just spoof many of you. Heck I'd wrack up Sphinns just for the "sexy" icon. I see it happen. rupalik is a prime example. rupalik is also a SphinnBot.

You've never seen someone type so much yet say so little because maybe you have a reading challenge? This whole Social Media thing tends to have some bugs in the underlying concepts. One of them is "reading" and the other is "understanding" what it is that you are reading. I think maybe that is why your perception is so. That's okay, keep feeding me sickness...

And Jill, yes, I am still an a*s as you say. Next time you make that comment, be sure to write it like the below example, if you don't people are going to miss the a*s part. ;)

pageoneresults, Jill says you are an a*s and that you really get under her thinn skin.

from pageoneresults 7 hours ago

Ah, this is perfect. Me experiment succeeded. I'll have the results of everything ready by sometime next week. No, I won't post it here. I'm going to place it where all of my "Friends" can read and opine.

The progression of this topic is a prime candidate for the Case Study. Here we have a topic that is basic in nature and even then, the basics are explained in such a way as to blow off the importance of them. You see, that is the problem these days, the basics are no longer just the basics. These types of misinformation campaigns are what harms the industry, not people like pageoneresults or whomever else has decided to take a stand and speak up for once. I've held back for more than seven years. In the six (06) days that I've been here, my profile is probably choking due to the amount of information I've generated in that time period.

Oh, and before you ask why is it that I have all this time to spend here and pester you and why I don't have any clients, yada, yada, yada, well...

I don't have any clients and I'm flat broke. I live in a freakin' trailer park and am sitting in my lawn chair right now enjoying the weather, it's hot out today. So, I have some free time to spare while we get the barbecue fired up (we're siphoning gas from the neighbors car now) and prepare for tonight's park festivities. Since I don't have a car, I'm pretty much relegated to the general vicinity of the trailer park. There are some interesting people, that is for sure. I'm one of them! ;)

You wanna know why I'm flat broke and almost homeless? Because I followed some basic advice a few years ago with one of my web properties. Someone told me that the meta description had little to no value. Then came some sort of algo shift and things changed. Freakin algos always jumping back and forth, back and forth. So, after the algo shift, our business tanked. We didn't know why either and we had to close a few months ago. Come to find out, it was all the "basic SEO" that we did which failed us. :(

from DarkMatter 7 hours ago

look man, I'm not trying to be a d*ck here, I don't enjoy insulting people. but you've managed to annoy most of the sphinn community in less than 2 days. take a deep breath and step back from your keyboard. it's not because youre not a top sphinner, its not because we hassle newbies. you're coming across as grossly uninformed and extremely obnoxious. I understand you're new to sphinn, but you'd do well to pull back on the throttle and do a little more listening instead of talking.

I admit you have gotten under my skin, and that's my problem. For both of our own good I won't be responding to your posts in any way ever again. Good luck.

from pageoneresults 7 hours ago

DarkMatter, would you consider those participating in this topic to be "most of the Sphinn Community?" If so, then I can understand where you are coming from. If that is the case, then there are more challenges afoot than I initially perceived.

"look man, I'm not trying to be a d*ck here."

No need to try, it comes naturally for some of us. ;)

"I don't enjoy insulting people. but you've managed to annoy most of the sphinn community in less than 2 days."

Actually it has been six (06) days to be exact, almost seven (07), where have you been? Oh, was this your once a week visit to Sphinn to see what the latest was?

"You're coming across as grossly uninformed and extremely obnoxious."

Oh, please do explain to me which of my comments show that I am grossly uninformed? I'll agree with obnoxious but not the extreme part. There are others who fit that bill perfectly, I'll leave that to them. What's the matter? Can't people just take a little constructive criticism? Do you always have to be right even when you are wrong? Ask me, I know...

"I understand you're new to sphinn, but you'd do well to pull back on the throttle and do a little more listening instead of talking."

Actually I'm not new to Sphinn, did you check my Profile? Nah, you didn't do that because there seems to be a reading comprehension somewhere.

"I admit you have gotten under my skin, and that's my problem. For both of our own good I won't be responding to your posts in any way ever again. Good luck."

Bummer! Just goes to show you've got a little bit more reading and understanding to do. For "your own good" not mine, it is probably best that you not opine any further.

Jill from Jill 6 hours ago

Just so everyone understands what's happening here, about once every couple of years, p1r gets off his meds and visits a forum or two and tries to wreak havoc.

The best thing to do is for the forum admins to ban him and then he goes away, gets back on his meds and leaves everyone alone for a few more years.

I would highly suggest that the Sphinn admins think seriously about going this route. It worked brilliantly at HRF a few years ago when he attempted something similar there. (You notice he mentioned he was banned.)

from pageoneresults 6 hours ago

Hi Jill. Are you still holding a grudge after all these years? I told you were wrong then and you didn't believe me so you just banned me from your forums. That's the best thing to do, just ban what you don't understand or can't deal with because of your lack of understanding.

Trusted TLDs - What are Trusted Top Level Domains?

For those inquiring minds who would like to know how to get yourself banned at some of the forums, read the above article. Since I got banned, I was forced to finish my research assembly at another destination. It had gotten to the point where they were Sphinning so badly that it was best to just ban me and remove the topic from existence or at least those parts that proved her and the lynch mob incorrect.

Also, now that I read that article again, I'm really glad that you told your audience what you did. They surely wouldn't be able to handle anything of that depth and I don't want them messing in the .gov and/or .edu spaces anyway. Nah, that is not for "your" typical audience.

g1smd from g1smd 5 hours ago

*** PageOne, you've managed to annoy most of the sphinn community in less than 2 days ***

Errrr, "most"? I'd say not a majority. Not even a "big minority". It's more like "a few", or less.

*** you're coming across as grossly uninformed and extremely obnoxious ***

I'd say PageOne is very informed, and there's plenty of stuff he's written in other places that easily shows that to be true. After well over a decade on the web, PageOne has been round the block at least several times now.

*** more listening instead of talking ***

Recent posts here seem to be the result of listening for almost a year, before posting.

I'd say he was more than overwhelmed with the amount of bullsh*t in SEO and SMO, the rampant spam, a very big lack of factual information; oh, and the various "voting clans".

But, then again, that has been a central feature of this industry for quite a while now.

*** about once every couple of years, p1r gets off his meds and visits a forum or two and tries to wreak havoc ***

Visits a forum or two? You have no idea.

You didn't notice that PageOne has been a moderator at WebmasterWorld for ten years?

Or, you did, but it would have harmed (no, destroyed) your argument to have mentioned it.

from MelissaF 5 hours ago

I am so glad Jill cleared that up. :-)

from pageoneresults 5 hours ago

Oh-oh, pageoneresults Friends are here. Hurry, we need some Sphinners here to put pageoneresults in his place right now!

That grabbed your damn attention, didn't it? :)

g1smd, thank you for stopping in. You actually brought a tear of happiness to me eyes, yes you did. It has been a bit overwhelming here these past six (06) days and I'm on a one man mission as they say. Its nice to know that "someone" here at Sphinn has my back.

Now, you've given me an idea and it would require me to take a few more days off from what really matters in my life, quality. And Jill, you have it all backwards. I actually went on me meds to jump into this Social Media Hell as I call it. Ya'll have commoditized this industry like its still 1995 or something. I see better quality work coming from third world countries. And discussions too when the damn translators give me something I can understand.

I won't get into tenure and/or pat myself on the back. I've gone beyond that point. What I will do is open up me Excel spreadsheet with all the Top Sphinners. I will go back to all those who have not posted in the last 90 days. I'll bet I can grab at least 50 Friends to join me in this freakin hell hole for a day or two. But you know what they will probably tell me? Its not worth it anymore pageone, they just don't get it. But, I'm going to try...

from pageoneresults 4 hours ago

Pligg - Best Viewed with Firefox. It appears you are using Internet Explorer, the most popular browser. We're sorry, but Pligg does not function well in the IE environment. We suggest switching to Firefox today. Click here to download Firefox now!

You know, I love Firefox, I do, I do! But, most of my work is done using IE as that is the majority audience. These days, both are kept open as they are becoming balanced very quickly. Either way, the Pligg Platform does not do well in IE when people start Commenting. If I remember correctly, Threadwatch had similar issues, especially when a page 2 was generated, then it got really interesting. Most of these topics I've participated in are no longer user friendly in IE, they choke and take forever to function as they should. < Just a note to the Pligg Developers.

"I'll bet I can grab at least 50 Friends to join me in this freakin hell hole for a day or two. But you know what they will probably tell me? Its not worth it anymore pageone, they just don't get it. But, I'm going to try."

I've given serious thought to the above and I think I'll just go on my merry way here before midnight. I really don't want to drag "my Peers" into this schit. They already told me that I was going into the abyss, I just didn't realize how dark the abyss could be. Ya'll have given a whole new meaning to the word Social Media. I think I'd prefer to call it Social Suicide in some instances. I start off each day with a balance of respect for those I encounter. In most instances, the respect is mutual, a somewhat older Social concept that appears to have been lost within this "small" Node.

Jill, you are a primary example of Social Suicide. And, you are the Administrator of a popular forum for newbies. Do you think your comments in this topic are reflective of a Forum Administrator? No they are not, you crossed the line. I was able to pull that string and play you like a banjo darling, just like the previous encounter. That was not my original intent, I respect your tenure in the industry and you generally have something good to say. But, when someone disagrees with your opinions, they become your nemesis and you'll do whatever possible to remind everyone of that fact.

Keep it up young lady, I document every single character of my existence and this stuff makes for excellent articles. In fact, get ready, www.SEOBlog.com will be here soon. Its a bit Black and White right now but I've got something brewing underneath to rock your world as they say. I'll show you what I think a Weblog should be. Heck, I was going to do the Brett_Tabke thing and use my robots.txt file for my Blog but I didn't want to copy one of my well respected SuPeeriors like that. I needed something original of my own. < What a freakin concept, eh?

from yojpotter2 3 hours ago

This is a helpful post...it makes SEO a lot easier especially for beginners like me..^^

from Halfdeck 2 hours ago

While I agree p1r can probably get the same mileage out of his comments using fewer words, from what I've scanned on WMW and on Sphinn I do believe he is an asset to Sphinn not a liability.

That WMW thread regarding META description being too short is interesting. I've addressed that two years ago here:

http://www.seo4fun.com/notes/supplementals.html

"Make sure your META description tags are no shorter than 60 characters. The point of using META description tags is to prevent Google from digging into your BODY HTML to fish out some irrelevant text from your navigation bar or listbox. However, if your META descriptions are too short (and 60 chars sounds like a lot, but it really isn't), Google will still dig into your source code."

I haven't really looked at METAs recently so things could be different now.

I've personally stripped META descriptions from my SEO blog, and instead structured HTML so that the "right" text will be pulled by Google's snippet generation bot. The bot was pretty primitive and often got lost in relatively complicated HTML (the last I checked), but once you understand how it parses HTML you can feed it the right snippet without using META descriptions. If you want to optimize for higher SERP CTR its still a good idea to write META descriptions.

As for Jill's test (or mine), it can't be held up as proof. The recent tests on whether the second link passes juice proved how difficult running an SEO test can be. What Googlers say regarding META descriptions is a good indicator but also isn't proof. Its interesting how people cherry picks info handed down by Google depending on whether it suits their purpose. Google's words about paid links are inconvenient FUD while Google's words about META tags is as good as gold.

Article Disclaimer: The SEO Consultants Directory does not endorse the opinions and/or facts expressed by members who provide marketing articles for our site. These search engine optimization and search engine marketing articles are here for you to review and make your own decisions.

Last modified: 2008-10-11T09:17:34-0700

"5 Easy SEO Tips to Optimize a Website"

Basic Sphinning Sphiraling out of Control

Comments

For Consumers

Featured Consultants

For SEO Consultants

SEO Job Opportunities