| LED Digest 2011: Meta Tags and Rankings |
|
|
|
================================================== The LED Digest Moderated Discussion List "Effective Online Advertising, Since 1997" pair Networks: The LED's Web Host Hosting and Domain Reg. from a Trusted Leader pair.com for Hosting | pairNIC.com for Domains ================================================== List Moderator: Published by: Adam Audette LED Digest post, led-digest.com http://www.led-digest.com .............................................. August 17, 2005 Issue #2011 .............................................. .....IN THIS DIGEST..... ======= NEW ===================== --== Email Filtering ==-- ~ Allan Gardyne "I prefer to take control of my own filtering..." ==== CONTINUING ================= --== Meta Tags Count! ==-- ~ Ajeet Khurana "...your experiment proves meta tags are read and recorded by the search engines." ~ Robert Bedard "They may not count as much as they did ten years ago...but they still count." ~ Bob Gladstein "...at least Yahoo will use the contents of the meta keyword tag." --== The Dublin Core and SEO ==-- ~ Trudy Levy "...librarians are a force with which to be reckoned." --== E-book Options ==-- ~ Nancy Cardinali "You should look into LightningSource.com." --== Not Just Linking ==-- ~ Kathryn Martyn "Why not go the 'I Kiss You' guy route? Remember him?" ~ Michael Martinez "...most businesses (large and small) don't compete in these highly competitive categories." ==== BILLBOARD =================== --== Security, Open Source & MS ==-- ~ Sheryl Coppenger ~ Charles Oertel ======= NEW ====================================== From: Allan Gardyne Subject: Email Filtering [was: Ebooks] > Unfortunately, I still haven't received that confirmation e-mail. > As near as I can determine, my ISPs sh-pam filters intercepted it. - Martha Retallick, LED 2010 Perhaps I'm wrong, but I get the impression you think the non-arrival of this email was PayPal's fault. The way I see it, if you're allowing your email to be filtered by your ISP, perhaps you're part of the problem. I hope your ISP provides you with a folder where you can examine the suspected junk. A few months ago, my ISP quietly introduced filtering and as far as I'm aware, didn't bother to tell me. Even worse, the ISP was automatically deleting every suspected junk email. Fortunately, the ISP provides an option to switch off filtering, which I did. I prefer to take control of my own filtering, using the features available in the latest version of Eudora. I use a variety of email addresses for different purposes, such as subscribing to newsletters, joining affiliate programs, corresponding with friends, etc. I filter all expected emails into a variety of folders. In most cases, whatever is left in my In folder is junk and can be quickly deleted. I find this system can cope with hundreds of emails a day. Allan Gardyne www.associateprograms.com ===== CONTINUING ================================= From: Ajeet Khurana Subject: Meta tags > MSN for instance, uses meta keywords, meta description, > and top text for their listings. I offer as proof the search > "stereoviews" which brings up my site stereoviews.com > at #1 showing both meta keywords and meta description > with no top text. - David L. Spahr, LED 2010 Hi David, What your experiment proves is that the META Tags are read and recorded by the search engines. When SEOs talk about the fact that META Tags do not count, they are saying that these Tags do not affect ones search engine rankings. These are two different things. I am of the view that the META Description and META Keywords do not matter, though the TITLE tag does. But, I am not arrogant enough to believe that is an un-contestable truth. Ajeet Khurana ------- new post - same topic -------- From: Robert Bedard Subject: Meta tags I normally like to stay out of "religious discussions", but I agree. META tags count. They may not count as much as they did ten years ago, there are more factors to consider, but they still count. I believe it is a mistake to believe that just because a particular SE shows top text, it is not still indexing your META tags. I have been doing websites for over ten years now, and I have always been using META tags. During all the "google-dances", the sites I had that were on top of rankings, stayed on top of rankings. During the roll-backs believed to be to deal with the 302 redirection issue earlier this year, I remained on top. I also do very well in Yahoo and MSN. I just smile patiently when I see people say that they do not use META tags ... as I said, I usually avoid "religious discussions." Robert Bedard ------- new post - same topic -------- From: Bob Gladstein Subject: Meta tags I've seen the contents of both the meta description and meta keywords tag showing up as snippets on MSN for a while now, so I'm convinced that MSN indexes the content of those tags. However, it's not clear to me whether, or to what extent, the contents of those tags are used for ranking. It may well be that MSN is indexing the tags as a way of checking to see if they match the on-page content, but are not using them for ranking at all. A couple of months ago, I created three pages on my site using a nonsense word that I had checked and found was not indexed anywhere in any of the three major search engines. The word in question was "xamonioid". I'm not an information retrieval expert, so I'm not going to claim this was a scientific study, but here's how I set up the three pages: The first page used the word in both meta tags and on the page. The second used it on the page and in the meta keywords tag, but not the description. The third only used it in the meta keywords tag. A search on MSN for the word brings up the first and second pages, but not the third, even if I change my settings to allow three pages from a domain to come up in my results. On Yahoo, I get pages 1 and 2, but if I click "repeat the search with the omitted results included" I get all three, in order. On Google I get pages 2 and 1, even if I add &filter=0 to the URL of the SERP (which I know shuts off the duplicate content filter, but I'm not certain as to whether it permits more than two results from a domain to come up). So my conclusion is that, at least on an utterly non-competitive search, at least Yahoo will use the contents of the meta keyword tag. I'm sure many of the subscribers to LED can think of better ways of answering the question, though. Bob Gladstein Raise My Rank Services ------- new post - new topic -------- From: Trudy Levy Subject: Dublin Core > ... the reference I quoted re. spamming can be found at > http://dublincore.org/resources/faq/index.shtml - Robin Estlin, LED 2010 Thanks Robin for the link. As Dublin Core people are librarians, I can see they couldn't resist taking a slam at spanners in the FAQ. Interesting that they are perpetuating David Spahr's myth that the "search engines don't use meta elements". Though, their real concern at this point is what search engines can be used to index material using DC metadata. As Michael Moore pointed out, librarians are a force with which to be reckoned. The use of metadata to push a website is an interesting tweak on its purpose. Trudy Levy, Consultant Digital Imaging Projects http://www.dig-mar.com -------- new post - new topic -------- From: Nancy Cardinali Subject: Ebooks > ... what is the best way to sell these books? - Brian Rotsztein, LED 2007 You should look into LightningSource.com . They will take care of the whole thing, from encryption to sales. You CAN encrypt so it cannot be printed or shared. Of course you can do all this yourself, but with Lightning Source, all you do is upload the ebook in PDF and they do the rest. Of course there is a fee for this set up (I think they are having a free set up for a few months). If I remember correctly, they do not keep a percentage of the sale. I don't know how they can do this, so you might want to check that out. Good luck. Nancy Cardinali -------- new post - new topic -------- From: Kathryn Martyn Subject: Linking > So, let's dispense with the myth of "reciprocal linking > is necessary in competitive searches". - Michael Martinez, LED 2009 Why not go the "I Kiss You" guy route? Remember him? He had a horrible website but it was so hilarious it was passed around and the press got wind, and I'd be willing to bet he was No. 1 for a time (not sure what the search term may have been). He's still No. 1 and No. 2 and had to get a new ISP, http://www.ikissyou.org/ I wonder why he hasn't added AdSense though. My point? Do something spectactular and sites will want to link to you. Have excellent information, provide something your visitors they aren't finding elsewhere. Be of value, be of service before the sale. Be the shopkeeper people tell their friends about, and you'll start seeing the link strategy working its magic. Sometimes getting a local following can do more for global marketing than people realize. Word-of-mouth may just be the killer app. Kathryn Martyn, M.NLP Ending Emotional Eating, One Bite at a Time http://www.onemorebite-weightloss.com -------- new post - same topic -------- From: Michael Martinez Subject: Linking > Those guys get links simply because of who they are. But > back in the real world of (really) small business owners like > me, things aren't quite the same, are they? - Steve Pronger, LED 2010 When every small business with a Web presences is confined to the highly competitive categories of fast food and Britney Spears, they will still be competing for 10 listings on the first (default) page of results. So how much help will reciprocal linking be to the majority of them? In the "real" world, most businesses (large and small) don't compete in these highly competitive categories. Now, maybe everyone on this list is trying to sell Britney Spears merchandise and hamburgers. If so, link away, folks. But at most only 9 of you are going to make it for those terms. And you WON'T get to number 1 on reciprocal links for "hamburger" and "britney spears". Michael Martinez http://www.michael-martinez.com/ ==== BILLBOARD =================================== From: Sheryl Coppenger Subject: Email apps > I am also a full-time web-programmer (since 95) - Paul Baugher, LED 2010 And I'm a full-time programmer since the late 70s and system administrator off and on during most of that time. > The open-source cronies love to hate on > Microsoft and that's all there is to it. There's some of that, but Microsoft has worked hard to earn a lot of the hatred and mistrust. > ... I would argue [Mozilla] is even more susceptible because > of its OPEN SOURCE nature. It's many times easier for hackers > to find vulnerabilities in a program when you have the source > sitting in front of you. But there also are more people "vetting" the code, patching bugs before they get to be a problem, and issuing patches and workarounds. And up until a few years ago Microsoft (and other big vendors for that matter) did not turn around patches in a reasonable amount of time. Microsoft is greatly improved in that area. > There is the point of contention that Microsoft > is the big bully and owns 90% market share... Microsoft isn't considered a big bully because they have market share and a great product. They're considered a big bully because they have in the past acted like a bully and tried to preserve or increase their market share in unfair ways. Case in point, the Sun/Java breach of contract suit. And others. http://java.sun.com/lawsuit/ http://news.findlaw.com/legalnews/lit/microsoft/index.html Besides, they may have 90% of the PC desktop market, but they sure don't have 90% of the server applications market. See below. > Just for the record, I have nothing against open-source, > its great if you're a communist (or just a starving artist). Sure you do. Otherwise you wouldn't be going out of your way to insult open source and the people who use it. > Just remember that more often then not, > you get what you pay for. Yes and no. Unless you're prepared to argue that children are better off in a state home with paid caretakers than with loving parents. There are lots of exceptions, and a lot of motivations better than the almighty dollar. People to do open source projects for the intellectual challenge, and people do open source projects for ego. But a very large part also has to with satisfaction with a job well done, and a desire to give back to the community. Not only could most of these people be paid for writing code, they *are* being paid for writing code. They're professionals who take a busman's holiday. Just like a carpenter might work on a Habitat for Humanity house or a college athlete might coach Little League. Or I help my 73 year old neighbor set up her Kodak printer doc. If not for the "open-source communists" there wouldn't be an Internet or any web apps for you to have a career *with*. Sendmail now has a commercial path as well as the open source path, but that was not true its first oh, 20 years? in operation. And it has about half of the market. All the major UNIX vendors ship it with the operating system. The Apache web server has about twice the market share of its Microsoft competitor according to http://news.netcraft.com/archives/web_server_survey.html And if you look at the trends, Apache's market share has increased but Microsoft's has fallen in the past 3 years. Perl and PHP, both open source products, probably blow ASP out of the water w.r.t. number of web applications launched. ISC's DNS server product, bind, is what lets you browse to www.yahoo.com instead of having to remember 68.142.226.43. Sure, Microsoft has a DNS server now many years after bind laid the groundwork. But none of the major DNS installations use it. The list goes on and on once you leave the desktop and the small office server. I'm hardly a hard-core open source fanatic. I use Microsoft on about half the desktops I use between work and home. But give Open Source its due. Remember that much of the anti-open source rhetoric comes out of a FUD (Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt) campaign by software vendors. And their motivation is not to protect you and me, it's to protect their bottom line. BTW, I thought the choice of "quote of the day" was priceless given the context. "Opensource. It's the difference between trust and antitrust." - VA Linux Sheryl Coppenger ------- new post - same topic -------- From: Charles Oertel Subject: Email apps Paul Baugher (LED 2010) very cleverly paints me into a corner with comments that dissuade a response from people who don't see through his tricks. He writes: > In regards to all the anti-Microsoft rhetoric being flung around... So, suggesting a program that fellow LEDers might fight useful is suddenly "rhetoric" because Microsoft didn't write it? He goes on to lambaste Open Source, calling its proponents "cronies" and discrediting their opinion and expertise by painting it as anti-Microsoft and communist propaganda. As if to contrast the unreliable utterings of those he opposes with some solid fact, he quotes a "fact" without any support, saying: > ... I would argue [Mozilla] is even more susceptible because > of its OPEN SOURCE nature. It's many times easier for hackers > to find vulnerabilities in a program when you have the source > sitting in front of you. Well Paul, all you have stated is an opinion. Have you not been trained in Web Security? The first thing I was taught is that security by obscurity is no security at all. The strength of Open Source is not whether hackers can see the code or not. The strength lies in the mindset of the programmer when he writes code that he _knows_ will be scrutinised by hundreds of programmers and hackers alike. There are no shortcuts, and there is nowhere to hide when coding Open Source. As a result of this, and the peer input and feedback, the code is much more secure than code produced in a closed code factory. Deadline and market pressures, and the knowledge that nobody else is privy to compromises being made often results in a lower quality of code from proprietary software vendors (and Microsoft is no exception here). I believe open source works so well that they _are_ prepared to publish all known vulnerabilities and to have others collaborate to fix them. Nobody has any idea how many vulnerabilities are hidden in Microsoft code - all we know is that every year a major virus cripples Microsoft systems, and that Windows users are the continuing victims of spyware and other computer problems. And this is three years into the so-called "Secure Computing" initiative touted whenever Microsoft makes yet another security patch announcement. And then a backhanded attempted insult, disguised as open-mindedness and objectiveness: > Just for the record, I have nothing against open-source, > its great if you're a communist (or just a starving artist). How about I am from Africa, where the license fee for Windows XP exceeds the average annual income? How about I am from South Africa, where communism is not a crime? regards Charles Oertel FineBushPeople.net ------------------------------------------------------- The LED Digest is sponsored by pair Networks: pair.com for Hosting | pairNIC.com for Domains © Copyright 1995-2005 Orange Wheel, LLC. All Rights Reserved. ----------------------------------------------------------------- "Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity." - Hanlon's Razor |
