SEO Tycoon

**chrishirst** · 01-27-2009, 07:53 AM

Quote:

Do you think, Google doesn't give any importance to (quality) backlinks?

Are you reading a different thread? because I don't see where I even suggested that.

Quote:

If links are advertising, To whom are they advertising? Are they advertising of your site to the visitors? or Are they advertising of your site to search engines?

Yes and Yes.

**web hosting** · 08:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chrishirst

Are you reading a different thread? because I don't see where I even suggested that.

Yes and Yes.

I didn't say you said Google doesn't give any importance to quality backlinks. I was merely inquiring what your thoughts are on backlinks as far as Google giving importance to them is concerned.

OK, Now, Do you think it is advertising when you see a link on the web? Then "Posting quality content on your site" is also advertising to search engine Bots it is because that's how the bots get to find the new articles on your site; By following links. Also when someone searches in Google and gets some results, It's also google "advertising" the sites' list (SERPs) to the users. Because Google shows the links to the visitor. Then they should not be called "Search Engine Results Pages" but should be called "Advertising Pages" or "Google Advertising Pages of some sites".

The fact is "Building backlinks" is "Search Engine Optimization", without a doudt. By building (quality) backlinks it's not like "You are advertising your site in a news paper or TV show" with which you won't get any better rankings in SERPS. By building (quality) backlinks, you are actually targeting to get some better rankings in Google and will (somewhat, even the slightest) get them.

When you do something with your site and it has some (positive) impact in search engine rankings, IT IS "SEARCH ENGINE OPTIMIZATION"

So, "LINKS ARE SEARCH ENGINE OPTIMIZATION", Not just "Advertising" as you claim in your signature or many posts of yours

.

**chrishirst** · 01-27-2009, 09:22 AM

How can it be optimising? Links are marketing

optimising means making some thing be the best it possibly can. How does having links somewhere else, make your site pages "better"?

The links advertise the presence of your pages.
The anchor text of the links advertises that site x sells a particular product.

**web hosting** · 01-27-2009, 09:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chrishirst

How can it be optimising? Links are marketing

optimising means making some thing be the best it possibly can. How does having links somewhere else, make your site pages "better"?

The links advertise the presence of your pages.
The anchor text of the links advertises that site x sells a particular product.

Jesus Christ! Do you know what you are talking about?

And please don't derive new meanings to "Search Engine Optimization". It's called "Search Engine Optimization" and Not "Your Site Optimization".

"Search Engine Optimization" is not about making your sites better. It's Making your site look good in the eyes of Search Engines. That is getting good rankings in search engines.

Do you even know there are two kinds of SEO as far as your site is concerned? One is On-Page Optimization and the Second is Off-Page optimization.

"And having links somewhere (in quality relevant sites) helps your site get better rankings in Search Engines", That is called Off-Page Optimization.

So the bottom line is, since links help your site get good rankings in search engines, "BUILDING LINKS IS SEARCH ENGINE OPTIMIZING YOUR SITE"

**chrishirst** · 01-27-2009, 10:41 AM

Ok then so in your world there is no difference between "Search Engine Marketing" and "Search Engine Optimising"

That's fine then, as long as we know.

**web hosting** · 01-27-2009, 10:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chrishirst

Ok then so in your world there is no difference between "Search Engine Marketing" and "Search Engine Optimising"

That's fine then, as long as we know.

HaHa, I am sorry, But I just understand I have been talking with the wrong Search Engine Optimization experts and wrong "unlimited Lying" web hosting providers (andrei155) here on this forum. Thanks

.

**magicvw** · 01-27-2009, 11:33 AM

I think this is just a question of semantics -what does the term SEO really mean to you? I've just been reading the Wikipedia page on SEO (and no, I don't trust everything I read on WP!), and I found the following sentence

SEO is not necessarily an appropriate strategy for every website, and other Internet marketing strategies can be much more effective

which basically implies that SEO is a form of marketing. Another definition of SEO is

the process of improving the volume and quality of traffic

I think we are going round in circles with this argument. SEO is a form of advertising, advertising is marketing, marketing is SEO - it's all different aspects of the same idea. The wikipedia SEO page also spends quite a time talking about improving pagerank:

Off-page factors (such as PageRank and hyperlink analysis) were considered as well as on-page factors (such as keyword frequency, meta tags, headings, links and site structure)

I do see Chris's point here, but I fear you're flogging a dead horse with this one. Most people these days equate SEO with link building as it's just another one of those things you can do in order to creep up the serps. You're right that optimisation means "making something the best you can", but it is the serps rank that you want to improve on, and nothing else. Backlinks do move you up in the serps, so they will increase your traffic, so they are SEO.

**jamestl2** · 01-27-2009, 08:18 PM

I wonder how many have actually read the PDF from Google that Chris mentioned earlier. (Here's the file for those who missed it.) They give plenty of definitions for what SEO is:

Quote:

Search engine optimization is often about making small modifications to parts of your website.

Quote:

Even though this guide's title contains the words "search engine", we'd like to say that you should base your optimization decisions first and foremost on what's best for the visitors of your site.

Quote:

Search engine optimization is about putting your site's best foot forward when it comes to visibility in search engines.

Just because you may get good "Rankings", doesn't mean that they'll automatically convert into what webmasters want. Would you really want to rank high for the query "New Pets for Sale" if your website is about web hosting tips? How many people will really click on a page titled "5 Web Hosting Tips For You" if they're looking for a new dog for their daughter's birthday? Not all pages will be this irrelevant, but the general idea can relate to anything the end user isn't specifically looking for.

The whole premise behind "Building Links for SEO or Ranking Purposes" goes against real SEO and what SE's are looking for. The fact that some lump the two together in this manner implies that they are working towards artificially inflating their own reputation within SEs, that's why they link build in the first place. And on top of that, all the "link building for ranking schemes" are in violation of G's guidelines and can NEGATIVELY impact site ranking positions and reputation.

Read their take on link schemes:

Quote:

However, some webmasters engage in link exchange schemes and build partner pages exclusively for the sake of cross-linking, disregarding the quality of the links, the sources, and the long-term impact it will have on their sites. This is in violation of Google's webmaster guidelines and can negatively impact your site's ranking in search results.

And from their Quality Guidelines:

Quote:

Avoid tricks intended to improve search engine rankings. A good rule of thumb is whether you'd feel comfortable explaining what you've done to a website that competes with you. Another useful test is to ask, "Does this help my users? Would I do this if search engines didn't exist?"

Quote:

Don't participate in link schemes designed to increase your site's ranking or PageRank. In particular, avoid links to web spammers or "bad neighborhoods" on the web, as your own ranking may be affected adversely by those links.

If you want to find links for direct traffic and marketing purposes, then go right ahead and seek out advertisees who are willing to build a relationship with you. But seeking links for the sole purpose of improving your "SEO" and getting chances of ranking higher in the SEs is against their TOS and NOT what those conducting SEO should be focused on, regardless of whether the link helps your site's SE positions or not.

Quote:

Originally Posted by magicvw

but it is the serps rank that you want to improve on, and nothing else. Backlinks do move you up in the serps, so they will increase your traffic

Not always true.

People aren't likely to click on your page in the results if the content and/or page snippet is completely irrelevant to what the searcher is looking for.

You are right though, much of this talk is semantics; and many people have differing definitions for what SEO is and involves precisely, given too that different Search Engines use different algorithms and are looking at differing factors from one another when deciding what page belongs where.

Also, I have even had a few pages that received traffic and clicks from search engines without a SINGLE inbound backlink pointing to the page (not many, but some), without even attempting to "rank highly" for targeted queries or test the playing fields for whatever is competitive and what not.

I'll take targeted traffic and conversions over rankings and specific SERP placements any day of the week.

**web hosting** · 07:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jamestl2

I wonder how many have actually read the PDF from Google that Chris mentioned earlier. (Here's the file for those who missed it.) They give plenty of definitions for what SEO is:

It doesn't matter how Google defines what SEO is. What matters is "Your intention when you are trying to rank your site well". Although I develop both "Content rich" and "average Content" sites, I give more importance to making money from them unlike most of those non-profit Org sites which provide good content. And that doesn't mean I use any kind of Blackhat techniques to creep up the SERPs.

Quote:

Just because you may get good "Rankings", doesn't mean that they'll automatically convert into what webmasters want. Would you really want to rank high for the query "New Pets for Sale" if your website is about web hosting tips? How many people will really click on a page titled "5 Web Hosting Tips For You" if they're looking for a new dog for their daughter's birthday? Not all pages will be this irrelevant, but the general idea can relate to anything the end user isn't specifically looking for.

That is one useless Para. What point are you trying to make there? Also Why would anyone want to rank for "New Pets for Sale" if their website is about "web hosting tips"? Are you referring to any irrelevant pages that might get displayed by those search engines in very rare instances? THAT PARA IS COMPLETELY USELESS.

Quote:

The whole premise behind "Building Links for SEO or Ranking Purposes" goes against real SEO and what SE's are looking for. The fact that some lump the two together in this manner implies that they are working towards artificially inflating their own reputation within SEs, that's why they link build in the first place. And on top of that, all the "link building for ranking schemes" are in violation of G's guidelines and can NEGATIVELY impact site ranking positions and reputation.

So, as an SEO expert, you would never work for any profit-looking companies, which in every possibility ask you to get some backlinks by buying them. You would never buy any links to get better rankings SINCE IT IS AGAINST TOS OF GOOGLE. So the bottom line is, you only provide good content and only by doing on-page optimization you try to get your site up in SERPs (I mean following all the TOS of Google), Good for you! If only you aren't another "andrei155" who claims that his host never oversells and yet advertises "Unlimited" threads on other forums.

Quote:

If you want to find links for direct traffic and marketing purposes, then go right ahead and seek out advertisees who are willing to build a relationship with you. But seeking links for the sole purpose of improving your "SEO" and getting chances of ranking higher in the SEs is against their TOS and NOT what those conducting SEO should be focused on, regardless of whether the link helps your site's SE positions or not.

Anyone that talks like that should be honored with "Ethical SEO" or "Google Ideal SEO"

Quote:

Not always true.

People aren't likely to click on your page in the results if the content and/or page snippet is completely irrelevant to what the searcher is looking for.

Here nobody is talking about completely fooling Google thereby visitors. When you buy backlinks, you link them to the RELEVANT URL of your site. It's not like you would link them to "Webhosting tips" with a "New Pets Sale" anchor text in a "Pets related website". That would be called "SEO nuts" (Yeah, I just coined that term).

Quote:

Also, I have even had a few pages that received traffic and clicks from search engines without a SINGLE inbound backlink pointing to the page (not many, but some), without even attempting to "rank highly" for targeted queries or test the playing fields for whatever is competitive and what not.

You wouldn't get ranks for "web hosting", "Make money online", etc (I mean, high competed) kind of keywords in that way.

Quote:

I'll take targeted traffic and conversions over rankings and specific SERP placements any day of the week.

That's what we have been talking about all the time. We are not going to link "Pet sales" link to "web hosting" site.

And without good rankings, you won't get much traffic from Search Engines. People SE Optimize (in my way, buying links and other stuff, slightly unethical as far as Search Engines aim is concerned) with the hope of getting targeted traffic and conversions. So, I would keep following my strategies of SE Optimmizing my sites any day of my life.

**jamestl2** · 01-30-2009, 01:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by web hosting

It doesn't matter how Google defines what SEO is. What matters is "Your intention when you are trying to rank your site well".

It most certainly does matter. Ethics or no ethics, clearly following the guidelines is the safest route you can take when working on your SEO and marketing campaign.

Nobody should be intending on "trying to rank their site well". What your results are for a search query aren't necessarily what others' will also get (Google has 100s of datacenters to distribute different results to users all throughout the world). Additionally, ranking well means nothing if it doesn't convert.

Quote:

Originally Posted by web hosting

That is one useless Para. What point are you trying to make there? Also Why would anyone want to rank for "New Pets for Sale" if their website is about "web hosting tips"? Are you referring to any irrelevant pages that might get displayed by those search engines in very rare instances? THAT PARA IS COMPLETELY USELESS.

Maybe you should re-read the "para" then.

How many times have you used a query to search for something you're looking for and end up having to scroll through many of the junk webpages listed in the results to find what you're looking for? The example I used was a random and hypothetical demonstration of such an instance (and extreme at that).

Quote:

Originally Posted by web hosting

So, as an SEO expert, you would never work for any profit-looking companies, which in every possibility ask you to get some backlinks by buying them. You would never buy any links to get better rankings SINCE IT IS AGAINST TOS OF GOOGLE. So the bottom line is, you only provide good content and only by doing on-page optimization you try to get your site up in SERPs (I mean following all the TOS of Google)

Firstly, I'm not an SEO expert, never have been and never will claim to be one.

Secondly if I ever was to do any "SEO Work" in the future, I certainly wouldn't perform useless tactics like rank checking or link begging. And ranking well means nothing if it doesn't convert. For-profit companies can still have their sites optimized without "searching for backlinks". Think about Youtube, Digg, etc. for example, they have large internet presences. Have they ever needed to worry about "link building" strategies to do well or make money?

Plus, why on Earth would any SEO Firm want to jeopardize their clients' standings or reputation within search engines just to make an extra buck or two? Buying links for ranking increases is grounds for getting BANNED from a SEs index, which leads to no more free traffic. If one wants to take the risk with their own site, fine, that's their choice. But then don't complain once all your pages are removed (which I've seen happen before).

Quote:

Originally Posted by web hosting

Good for you! If only you aren't another "andrei155" who claims that his host never oversells and yet advertises "Unlimited" threads on other forums.

Huh???

I have no idea what you're talking about here....

Quote:

Originally Posted by web hosting

Anyone that talks like that should be honored with "Ethical SEO" or "Google Ideal SEO"

Or they could perhaps be called a "Smart SEO", or "Effective SEO". What's your point?

Quote:

Originally Posted by web hosting

You wouldn't get ranks for "web hosting", "Make money online", etc (I mean, high competed) kind of keywords in that way.

And you know exactly what queries I've received clicks from and where exactly they were positioned in the user's SERP....... how??

I've never done any link exchanging or building and my sites are doing just fine. Besides, queries like those are really too broad for someone to truly find a decent answer to a specific problem, in my opinion.

Quote:

Originally Posted by web hosting

That's what we have been talking about all the time.

Really? Hadn't seemed like it, and I haven't seen it discussed by anyone anywhere else in the thread. I believe I was the first to mention them

.

Quote:

Originally Posted by web hosting

And without good rankings, you won't get much traffic from Search Engines. People SE Optimize (in my way, buying links and other stuff, slightly unethical as far as Search Engines aim is concerned) with the hope of getting targeted traffic and conversions. So, I would keep following my strategies of SE Optimmizing my sites any day of my life.

And without a site in the index, you won't get ANY traffic from Search Engines, once they catch and ban you, that is. If you plan ahead, is it likely that they will? Probably not (as many people seem to get away with it), but no one can say for sure.

My point being, IF they do catch you spamming their index and manipulating their SERPs (even if only slightly), you're basically SOL. There's nothing you can do about it; and you'll lose a huge, FREE source of targeted traffic for good.

**web hosting** · 01:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jamestl2

It most certainly does matter. Ethics or no ethics, clearly following the guidelines is the safest route you can take when working on your SEO and marketing campaign.

Nobody should be intending on "trying to rank their site well". What your results are for a search query aren't necessarily what others' will also get (Google has 100s of datacenters to distribute different results to users all throughout the world). Additionally, ranking well means nothing if it doesn't convert.

So, You are an "Ethical SEO" and never even spill a couple of extra Keywords in your article to make it a little keyword rich, Right? Please tell me if yes or no and explain a bit, because it's a little important for my next post.

Quote:

"Nobody should be intending to rank their site well"

Oh, No!! Then don't follow even those guidelines provided by Google as to "Ethically Optimizing" your site. Just post a good article and a relevant title which exactly describes the content (Topic) of the article. "IT IS BECAUSE YOU SHOULD NOT BE INTENDING TO RANK YOUR SITE WELL". Also don't do even the "Ethical SEO guidelines provided by Google" --- Again Coz you should not be intending to rank well.

Quote:

Maybe you should re-read the "para" then.

I have already read it enough times and it still doesn't make any sense to me. And I believe it doesn't make any sense to anyone with quite a bit of good SEO knowledge. Because there is no point in there. Read Below!

Quote:

How many times have you used a query to search for something you're looking for and end up having to scroll through many of the junk webpages listed in the results to find what you're looking for? The example I used was a random and hypothetical demonstration of such an instance (and extreme at that).

That must be a problem from the end of Search Engines if you ever run into that kind of situation. Probably, their Algorithm is still not good enough to provide relevant SERPs for that certain keyword or phrase.

Also, what effect does it have on "Ethically SE Optimized sites" and "Unethically (building or buying links) SE Optimized sites? Do you think you will get different SERP pages for "Ethical" and "Unethical" SE Optimized sites (leave the SERP ranking gain here)? If so, Please explain why!

Do you think "Ethical SEO" sites get good conversions and "Unethical SEO" sites don't convert well?

Quote:

Secondly if I ever was to do any "SEO Work" in the future, I certainly wouldn't perform useless tactics like rank checking or link begging.

Haha, "LINK RANK CHECKING AND LINK BEGGING (Hmm, I never used that word "begging" and will never call it like that) ARE "NOT" USELESS TACTICS". If you call it "Link Building" an useless tactic, You are definite SEO NewBie. BTW, Respect "Links" they can bring a lot of difference in SERPs (Obviously you haven't experienced the power of links yet if you are a real "Ethical SEO" like you claim).

Also, "Link Rank Checking" is not a tactic, It's ... Let's say ... a process.

Quote:

And ranking well means nothing if it doesn't convert. For-profit companies can still have their sites optimized without "searching for backlinks". Think about Youtube, Digg, etc. for example, they have large internet presences. Have they ever needed to worry about "link building" strategies to do well or make money?

So, You have got any "NEW" thing (I don't understand what to call it that's why I used "thing") to get conversions? Please share it with us, We are all eagerly looking for it.

Don't quote "Youtube or Digg". They don't fit in for the examples what you are trying to prove. "Youtube" is a site that came up based on "technology", and "convenience or easyness in watching videos". Digg is a "concept" related site. Besides you don't know how much they might have spent in advertising to introduce their sites and concept to people. BOTH THE SITES ARE TOTALLY DIFFERENT TO WHAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT.

By the way, Why do you talk about "YouTube"? It's site that is running their business taking advantage of the loopholes of CopyRight Laws. Don't watch CopyRighted movies songs and all the stuff on YouTube or any sites for that matter --- "It's UNethical" and also "Illegal" depending on where you are based.

Quote:

Plus, why on Earth would any SEO Firm want to jeopardize their clients' standings or reputation within search engines just to make an extra buck or two? Buying links for ranking increases is grounds for getting BANNED from a SEs index, which leads to no more free traffic. If one wants to take the risk with their own site, fine, that's their choice. But then don't complain once all your pages are removed (which I've seen happen before).

They don't run an ad in Google Adwords campaigns or any news paper. You can buy links without telling anyone else, other than the one who you are buying the links from. Also, That's why many firms build their own network of different niche sites, so that they wouldn't have to ask anyone else.

Quote:

Huh???

I have no idea what you're talking about here....

Then go and read it here http://www.webmaster-talk.com/web-ho...ing-web-5.html

Quote:

Or they could perhaps be called a "Smart SEO", or "Effective SEO". What's your point?

No, Both the terms don't suit them. They are neither smart nor effective. Best are "Ethical SEO" and "Google-Rules-Following SEO kind of terms. There are always the two I used in my other post.

Quote:

And you know exactly what queries I've received clicks from and where exactly they were positioned in the user's SERP....... how??

You are definitely a SEO Newbie or posting like that in frustration. YOU DON'T GET GOOD SERPS FOR HIGH-COMPETED KEYWORDS - Without many links. Also, How can you say I got some traffic to some of my pages WITOUT MENTIONING HOW COMPETITIVE THOSE KEYWORDS ARE? You think Geting traffic to a couple of pages for some not-so-good keywords without any inbound links an ACHIEVEMENT. If so, Please think again.

A LOT DEPENDS ON HOW COMPETITIVE THE KEYWORD IS!

Quote:

I've never done any link exchanging or building and my sites are doing just fine. Besides, queries like those are really too broad for someone to truly find a decent answer to a specific problem, in my opinion.

Then build a couple of links and see the changes for yourself.

Quote:

Really? Hadn't seemed like it, and I haven't seen it discussed by anyone anywhere else in the thread. I believe I was the first to mention them

.

HaHa, LOL, You don't have to discuss it seperately about "targeted traffic and conversions" when you are discussing about "SEO". "SEO" is for nothing but "targeted traffic" and thereby can lead to "conversions". SEO, Organic Traffic, and Conversions are interrelated.

Your words really made me say "LOL".

Also have you got any other "Thing" that can get you "Targeted traffic and Conversions"? Please share it here, Thanks in advance. But Don't tell me to put a banner on high-traffic (100%) relevant sites and get good conversions. I can't laugh again.

Quote:

And without a site in the index, you won't get ANY traffic from Search Engines, once they catch and ban you, that is. If you plan ahead, is it likely that they will? Probably not (as many people seem to get away with it), but no one can say for sure.

My point being, IF they do catch you spamming their index and manipulating their SERPs (even if only slightly), you're basically SOL. There's nothing you can do about it; and you'll lose a huge, FREE source of targeted traffic for good.

There are strategies to Link-Build. Just use your brain and you would understand how you can safely build links.

Also, you can also get your site "Penalized" (not banned) for doing excessive On-Page Optimization (Yeah, Your Ethical SEO). A Penalty is no better than "BAN". And If you can get away without getting penalized with your "Ethical SEO", So can we with our "Unethical (building links) SEO".

And finally, this thread and the other thread that I gave the link in this post are telling probably I am wasting my time here.

**jamestl2** · 01-30-2009, 12:45 PM

If you can't even read the replies in this thread, then you don't need to post.

**web hosting** · 01:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jamestl2

If you can't even read the replies in this thread, then you don't need to post.

What do you mean? Do you mean I can't understand your points? If that is the case, I have already proven there are no points in your post.

But if you mean, If I can't spend time to read posts, the answer is "I hate reading and replying to pointless posts". But I have already posted a couple of posts in response to pointless posts.

IF I COULDN'T SEE YOUR POINTS, PLEASE LET ME KNOW WHERE THOSE POINTS ARE - at least with a one line sentence (so that you wouldn't have to waste your time for my ignorance).

To be frank, I can't stand people who unsuccessfully try to argue even though there is no point in their argument. That's all I can say. Thanks.

**jamestl2** · 01-31-2009, 12:03 AM

*sigh*

It's "pointless" replying to someone if they don't actually take the time to read and understand the posts and the context in which they are delivered. (It's also hard to take someone seriously if all they do is insult and laugh at points they cannot or choose not to comprehend.)

You want to know where my "points" are? Fine....

Quote:

Originally Posted by web hosting

So, You are an "Ethical SEO" and never even spill a couple of extra Keywords in your article to make it a little keyword rich, Right? Please tell me if yes or no and explain a bit, because it's a little important for my next post.

No, I'm not an "Ethical SEO", I would have to be an SEO in order for that to be possible. As I previously stated I do not worry about competitiveness of keywords or where my potential rankings might end up when I write my pages, they are distractions for me and can disrupt the flow of reading for my visitors.

Quote:

Originally Posted by web hosting

Oh, No!! Then don't follow even those guidelines provided by Google as to "Ethically Optimizing" your site. Just post a good article and a relevant title which exactly describes the content (Topic) of the article. "IT IS BECAUSE YOU SHOULD NOT BE INTENDING TO RANK YOUR SITE WELL". Also don't do even the "Ethical SEO guidelines provided by Google" --- Again Coz you should not be intending to rank well.

Nooooo.....
If you had read the first paragraph from my last post, I stated that Google uses Hundreds of Datacenters to produce SERPs. Where you supposedly rank well on one datacenter, the rankings will probably be in the toilet on another. Rankings fluctuate and change all the time, and you have no control over it because they decide when to change page placements when they see fit. That's why you should not be "intending to rank well".

Quote:

Originally Posted by web hosting

Do you think "Ethical SEO" sites get good conversions and "Unethical SEO" sites don't convert well?

Of course not. BOTH types of sites can convert well.

Quote:

Originally Posted by web hosting

Haha, "LINK RANK CHECKING AND LINK BEGGING (Hmm, I never used that word "begging" and will never call it like that) ARE "NOT" USELESS TACTICS". If you call it "Link Building" an useless tactic, You are definite SEO NewBie. BTW, Respect "Links" they can bring a lot of difference in SERPs (Obviously you haven't experienced the power of links yet if you are a real "Ethical SEO" like you claim).

Again..... NO!

Had you actually read the paragraph, I never mentioned anything like "Link Rank Checking", I've never even heard of the term before! But when it comes to webpage SERP rankings, re-read (the boldings from) the first paragraph I posted:

Quote:

Nobody should be intending on "trying to rank their site well". What your results are for a search query aren't necessarily what others' will also get (Google has 100s of datacenters to distribute different results to users all throughout the world). Additionally, ranking well means nothing if it doesn't convert.

Link begging means asking people and requesting links from them (aka spamming).

And please point me to the post where I claim to be an "Ethical SEO" or an SEO of any kind!

BTW I have received plenty of links I didn't ask for.

Quote:

Originally Posted by web hosting

Then go and read it here http://www.webmaster-talk.com/web-ho...ing-web-5.html

And what does that thread and the entire "unlimited" hosting concept have to do with THIS discussion???

Quote:

Originally Posted by web hosting

No, Both the terms don't suit them. They are neither smart nor effective.

Proof???

So according to you, just because some website owners actually follow the guidelines Search Engines (put out there for their own benefit), that automatically means they're not smart or effective SEO's? If my assumption is correct, then that has to be a joke....

Quote:

Originally Posted by web hosting

You are definitely a SEO Newbie or posting like that in frustration. YOU DON'T GET GOOD SERPS FOR HIGH-COMPETED NICHES - Without not many links. Also, How can you say I got some traffic to some of my pages WITOUT MENTIONING HOW COMPETITIVE THOSE KEYWORDS ARE? You think Geting traffic to a couple of pages for some not-so-good keywords without any inbound links an ACHIEVEMENT. If so, Please think again.

Again, Proof??? Links are not the only component of the algorithm G uses to calculate their results with. I stated I got a few, they weren't much, it just means ranking for some phrases is possible w/o links. And I don't view getting clicks from search engines as some sort of "achievement".

Plus how can they possibly be "not-so-good keywords" if I'm gaining targeted traffic from them?

Quote:

Originally Posted by web hosting

HaHa, LOL, You don't have to discuss it seperately about "targeted traffic and conversions" when you are discussing about "SEO". "SEO" is for nothing but "targeted traffic" and thereby can lead to "conversions". SEO, Organic Traffic, and Conversions are interrelated.

But many do. Just try reading through some of the other threads here for example. Many of them have chased after rankings and SERPs without even considering targeted traffic or conversions.

Quote:

Originally Posted by web hosting

Also have you got any other "Thing" that can get you "Targeted traffic and Conversions"? Please share it here, Thanks in advance.

Natural Links, Advertising, Word-of-Mouth Referrals, Direct Visitations. Search Engines aren't the only potential source of traffic, you know.

If you'd like more points of mine cleared up and you're willing to actually take part in a rational discussion without having to resort to shouting and insults, I'll be all for the good debate.

**web hosting** · 02-01-2009, 05:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jamestl2

*sigh*

It's "pointless" replying to someone if they don't actually take the time to read and understand the posts and the context in which they are delivered. (It's also hard to take someone seriously if all they do is insult and laugh at points they cannot or choose not to comprehend.)

You want to know where my "points" are? Fine....

No, I'm not an "Ethical SEO", I would have to be an SEO in order for that to be possible. As I previously stated I do not worry about competitiveness of keywords or where my potential rankings might end up when I write my pages, they are distractions for me and can disrupt the flow of reading for my visitors.

So, you are not even an SEO, probably some blogger who is kind of well-known in their own community. Then I have wasted a lot of time here debating with you.

Quote:

Nooooo.....
If you had read the first paragraph from my last post, I stated that Google uses Hundreds of Datacenters to produce SERPs. Where you supposedly rank well on one datacenter, the rankings will probably be in the toilet on another. Rankings fluctuate and change all the time, and you have no control over it because they decide when to change page placements when they see fit. That's why you should not be "intending to rank well".

All the SEO's intend to rank well when they optimize their site. It is because they know rankings fluctuate from a bit to a lot depending on many factors like the searcher's location and all the stuff. Also they count it on an average basis when they are optimizing their site to get some SE traffic. They don't sit back and do nothing because of that "Rankings fluctuate and change all the time" not-bad-fact.

Please explain how do you think the rankings fluctuate? Then I will explain mine. If you have good knowledge you should know how the rankings fluctuate in different data centers SERPs.

Do you have any idea based on what factors the rankings change? I think I have got some knowledge on it. That's why I am asking. Also, Google has only got one main Algorithm, but depending on the country specific data centers there are some little changes in the Algorithms.

Quote:

Of course not. BOTH types of sites can convert well.

Yeah.

Quote:

Again..... NO!

Had you actually read the paragraph, I never mentioned anything like "Link Rank Checking", I've never even heard of the term before! But when it comes to webpage SERP rankings, re-read (the boldings from) the first paragraph I posted:
Link begging means asking people and requesting links from them (aka spamming).

That was my mistake. It should be "Rank Checking". I shouldn't use the term "Link Begging".

Quote:

And please point me to the post where I claim to be an "Ethical SEO" or an SEO of any kind!

So, What are you? You don't follow any Search Engine Guidelines to optimize your site? I have seen some Internet Marketing Gurus' blogs where they share their views with their readers, are you that kind?

Or you are someone with the "I-don't-give-a-****-to-SEO" attitude?

Quote:

BTW I have received plenty of links I didn't ask for.

I receive too. But the impact in SERPs depend on how quality they are.

Quote:

And what does that thread and the entire "unlimited" hosting concept have to do with THIS discussion???

It is related in that, that guy andrei155 says the never oversells but in fact offers unlimited offers on other forums. On the web, you can fake whatever you want. On your blog you can post like "I made $600,000 this month and here is a the proof" and then can photoshop a couple of checks (by adding two or three zeroes on the right side) you have received from the ad networks.

I just quoted that as an example and I still doubt you maybe one of that kind who says "I follow ethical ways" but in fact do quite the opposite.

Quote:

Proof???

So according to you, just because some website owners actually follow the guidelines Search Engines (put out there for their own benefit), that automatically means they're not smart or effective SEO's? If my assumption is correct, then that has to be a joke....

No, They are neither "SMART" nor "EFFECTIVE" SEO in comparison with with the "Link buying" Unethical SEO's. And it is a joke that you think it is joke.

Quote:

Again, Proof??? Links are not the only component of the algorithm G uses to calculate their results with. I stated I got a few, they weren't much, it just means ranking for some phrases is possible w/o links. And I don't view getting clicks from search engines as some sort of "achievement".

"Links are not the only component of the algorithm of Google", But they are the most important to move you up in SERPs when your site has reached certain level (Content wise).

And good for you, "You don't view getting clicks from search engines as some sort of achievement". Because I thought you would in fact view it as great achievement, when you said you got some traffic and clicks from search engines without mentioning how competitive they are. Even, I can get targeted traffic and clicks if I want to rank for "I am a lazy and stupid SEO" without any backlinks and with only one article on a one day old site.
But that wouldn't earn me any money.

What matters is "Having your site on the first page of Google for a high-competed (good paying) keyword"

Quote:

Plus how can they possibly be "not-so-good keywords" if I'm gaining targeted traffic from them?

It depends on what you consider as your targeted traffic. Please do some research and select the highest paying keyword in adsense (just for an example) and also select the lowest paying keyword and start two sites on both of them. Whatever traffic you get for both of them is targeted traffic. But then you would understand the word what "competition" means. Also, you would see the difference between the earnings of two sites per each click.

Quote:

But many do. Just try reading through some of the other threads here for example. Many of them have chased after rankings and SERPs without even considering targeted traffic or conversions.

Prove it! How they failed to get targeted traffic and conversions if they succeded in gettting good rankings.

Quote:

Natural Links, Advertising, Word-of-Mouth Referrals, Direct Visitations. Search Engines aren't the only potential source of traffic, you know.

Natural Links and Word-of-Mouth Referrals are OK (THEY SHOULD NOT BE DISCUSSED IN SEO THOUGH).

But Advertising?? I call it "Unethical" (SInce you call "link Building or buying unethical). It's artificially inflating their own reputaion in the eyes of people. Let's say someone builds a site and works years on it and probably offers good content and gets good traffic. He deserves it. But then you come out of nowhere and puts a banner or link on his site by paying them $$ and gets clicks and targeted traffic. Nobody knows if your site has good content or not. And if your site has good content it comes in the Search Engines on its own anyway. Even if it doesn't come you don't care COZ YOU NEVER TAKE THE "UNETHICAL PATH".

But if you are getting targeted traffic and clicks for your sites (forget about competition here), you will also get targeted traffic and conversions here. So don't put "ADVERTISING" in your list.

Also, How does the "Direct Visitations" work?

Quote:

If you'd like more points of mine cleared up and you're willing to actually take part in a rational discussion without having to resort to shouting and insults, I'll be all for the good debate.

Thanks, I will be too. But only that I am working on a couple of projects already, but I will dedicate at least some of my time to this thread daily.

Also, If you don't mind, I am 25, Can I know how old you are?

**chrishirst** · 02-01-2009, 08:45 AM

Quote:

So, you are not even an SEO, probably some blogger who is kind of well-known in their own community. Then I have wasted a lot of time here debating with you.

And your claim to fame is?
because a little over 5 weeks ago nobody here had ever heard of you.

Unless ....

... You really are the "6 Million Dollar Man"

BTW I haven't read the rest of the post yet.

**web hosting** · 02-01-2009, 10:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chrishirst

And your claim to fame is?
because a little over 5 weeks ago nobody here had ever heard of you.

Unless ....

... You really are the "6 Million Dollar Man"

BTW I haven't read the rest of the post yet.

It's not about "claim to fame" or any crap like that. And it's still not about how long you have been a member somewhere or whether you are famous or not.

He says he doesn't optimize his site in any way, he doesn't do any research. He says he is not an SEO of any kind.

So, All the knowledge (let's say his "views and opinions") he has about SEO is not proven to fetch any results in SERPs. Probably he is the kind of person who depends on others for his SEO "views and opinions" like "Oh Matt Cutts said age of a domain doesn't matter in most cases" and "And chrishirt said links are advertising, not optimizing" so these are the points I learned today. I should use them in my SEO posts. ------ I hate this kind of SEO knowledge. They don't know much about SEO but give suggestions to others as to how to optimize their sites by quoting what someone said.

Also, read about his Google Data centre debate, That's just plain RIDICULOUS! He says "Nobody should be intending to rank well because Google has those many datacenters and rankings fluctuate all the time". What a quote that is!

Anybody with a bit if knowledge would understand the effect of data centers in rankings and "WHY SHOULD YOU BE INTENDING TO RANK WELL WHEN YOU SEO YOUR SITE".

Also Chris, I suggest you read every post and point out if there is something wrong even in the posts of your buddies and not back up them! (Yeah, I think you back up your buddies here especially after your notorious "Unlimited Master Reseller = (kind of) = VPS" post)

**chrishirst** · 02-01-2009, 12:46 PM

Quote:

Also, read about his Google Data centre debate, That's just plain RIDICULOUS! He says "Nobody should be intending to rank well because Google has those many datacenters and rankings fluctuate all the time". What a quote that is!

And you dispute this because?

Maybe you would prefer that it came from someone else.
5 Reasons Why Rankings Are A Poor Measure Of Success

Quite honestly, it should be you that it extending your knowledge of real world optimising, rather than the magical formulaic stuff bandied about by "experts". The majority of the "SEO theory" stuff was put together when AltaVista was the top search engine or when Google was just getting developed and hasn't moved on since then.
And obviously if you don't like the way we see things from our experiences and testing, you are of course free to stay on the safe forums that will agree with whatever you say.

Quote:

Also Chris, I suggest you read every post and point out if there is something wrong even in the posts of your buddies and not back up them!

Maybe you should read a few more posts.
I will happily back someone up where their point of view makes sense and it doesn't necessarily have to be same as my point of view, and I will equally vehemently disagree where they are obviously BS, doesn't matter to me whether they are "buddies" or not.
And if someone has experienced a particular effect

**web hosting** · 02-01-2009, 03:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chrishirst

And you dispute this because?

Because I believe that "Rankings don't fluctuate that much", except for country specific data center SERPs and worldwide SERPs of Google. When I said "don't fluctuate that much" I meant there may be a little difference but not that considerable so as to affect your (previous) conversions.

The ranking fluctuations would be considerable between the SERPs generated for a specific country audience and the SERPs generated for the rest of the world (example Google.co.uk serps and Google.com serps).

Other than that, there wouldn't be much difference between the serps. And when I said that I was talking about established sites for high-competed one word keywords and two, three word key phrases, not about those "Long Tail" keywords which even a one day site can rank well for.

Quote:

Maybe you would prefer that it came from someone else.
5 Reasons Why Rankings Are A Poor Measure Of Success

That IS old news, not because the article was written on Jan 31st, 2008. But because I already knew those points long before. In fact they seem useless to me now.

These days you have got access to all those keyword tools, which will give you all the data as to how many searches are done a month for a particular keyword or phrase, What is the ad revenue potential, what is the competition....... everything you need to know to target a niche and get good conversions. Then who should anyone target and optimize for useless keywords?

Quote:

Quite honestly, it should be you that it extending your knowledge of real world optimising, rather than the magical formulaic stuff bandied about by "experts". The majority of the "SEO theory" stuff was put together when AltaVista was the top search engine or when Google was just getting developed and hasn't moved on since then.

I am sorry but I couldn't understand what point you intended to make there.

Quote:

And obviously if you don't like the way we see things from our experiences and testing, you are of course free to stay on the safe forums that will agree with whatever you say.

I am not here to make people agree with whatever I say. I wanted to learn and share my knowledge (if ever I have.. from your point of view) here. But a couple of you guys are really confusing me. In fact when I read a couple of posts here, well, I don't know how to express it but it's not insulting or anything I thought "Those posts are logic-less and are posted by people who believe whatever they read online". I want to stress this point again "SEO is testing and making a note of strategies which fetch you good results", Not what some "BIG SEO Expert" or someone else said.

Quote:

And obviously if you don't like the way we see things from our experiences and testing

I should question what the word "our" means here. Definitely the word "OUR" shouldn't include "jamestl2", who says that he doesn't test, optimize, research etc. Also it shouldn't include "Fedakin" who says he never does any testing.

What I noticed here is people just quote some link and say since "OUR BIG EXPERT" said so, that's the way it is.

I would actually think about the logic in what they said, do some research and test it and then compare the results and then will post my own version of it. But you just can't blindly believe what someone said.

Quote:

Maybe you should read a few more posts.
I will happily back someone up where their point of view makes sense and it doesn't necessarily have to be same as my point of view, and I will equally vehemently disagree where they are obviously BS, doesn't matter to me whether they are "buddies" or not.
And if someone has experienced a particular effect

May Be I was wrong, Let me see for some more time.