SEO Tycoon

**Learning Newbie** · 11-07-2008, 08:38 PM

Probably this isn't news to anyone but me. Still, it might make for a good, and more broad, discussion?

I've just learned that there's a peer reviewed search engine reverse engineering magazine. Which is news to me, and sounds promising in that the usual black magic and witchcraft that shows up all over the web, would be stopped at the door.

Of broader interest, what do you think are better ways to learn about this problem, than signing up under two user accounts, then asking and answering questions from 1996? People have come to understand and be able to explain Quasars, and other problems far more difficult than this one.

**sirtokealot** · 11-10-2008, 02:49 PM

any chance of a link please

**seolman** · 10:54 PM

When you say "peer reviewed search engine reverse engineering magazine" John...I'm not sure what you mean. It certainly implies assumptions being made about how specific engines function (algorithms?) - and I guess peers in the industry somehow offering input/approval/vetting of theories/testing?

Anything deeper available? Like who or when? Links?

**hittjw** · 11-10-2008, 11:36 PM

I'm interested too. Some of the crap advice I see on so called SEO guru's pages I know doesn't work anymore. I'm even seeing some recycle old materials replacing some tool name with another tool. It would be nice to have a place to go for real insights outside of the few places I trust.

Best,

Justin

**Learning Newbie** · 11-11-2008, 04:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by seolman

When you say "peer reviewed search engine reverse engineering magazine" John...I'm not sure what you mean. It certainly implies assumptions being made about how specific engines function (algorithms?) - and I guess peers in the industry somehow offering input/approval/vetting of theories/testing?

Anything deeper available? Like who or when? Links?

I'm not sure of any details, either. It's been a pretty hectic weekend, so I've been busy with other things - sort of hoped others would be familiar enough to chime in.

In the "reality" sciences, people don't get to announce "the moon doesn't exist", self publish it, and be taken seriously. Peer review is done still by other fallible humans, but there's a tremendous amount of competition, so if one guy will begrudge the other guy that it's true and A beat B to discovering it, that gives a lot more confidence. In SEO, that level of competition is present, so even while nobody who hasn't signed a non disclosure agreement lately has the code in front of them, if two people from competing segments will agree, and give only one of them credit, again, that gives me a lot more confidence.

**seolman** · 11-11-2008, 10:27 PM

Sorry - I was so zapped last night I guess my reply was as stupid as it reads today (sorry just emerging from pneumonia)...I know what peer review is. I'm just looking for more details on the review process - who would be involved, any standards known yet etc.. but from your reply you're obviously throwing a lure in the water to see who else might bite on the post.

Thanks for starting the concept - let's hope someone else chimes in...

**VirtuosiMedia** · 11:28 PM

I think I might be a little confused as well. Are you saying you found such a resource or that you want to create one?

I'm assuming the later. A few ideas: Have the tests be reviewed both before and after they are run. It can be easy to set up a bad test (for example, having more than one variable), but a peer review before should be able to point something like that out. I would guess data would also be absolutely vital. A browser plugin or some kind of API might be nice for entering data, as would integration with Google Analytics (I'm fairly certain you can download your data from GA).

A common set of tests, with specific criteria, would also be helpful for gathering the most reliable results as one test is hardly ever conclusive. Suppose you have Test 1A: The Title Tag, which tests whether or not a title tag is useful in SEO. If 1000 people run the same test, you can probably make a fairly good hypothesis with the data. Think Project Euler, but for a purpose and with data collection. Another advantage to crowd sourcing it would be that it is more cost effective to spread the tests around rather than having one person or company do it.