| LED Digest 2390: SEO Standards |
|
|
|
================================================== The LED Digest Moderated Discussion List "Effective Online Advertising, Since 1997" Data > Information > Knowledge > Wisdom www.GetWebContent.com/LED : the LED's Key Sponsor The Web's Most Experienced SEO Content Providers. ================================================== List Moderator: Published by: Adam Audette LED Digest adam, led-digest.com http://www.led-digest.com .............................................. April 17, 2007 Issue no. 2390 .............................................. .....IN THIS DIGEST..... ====== NEW ====================== --== Domain Names in a Will? ==-- ~ Dan Rosenfield "How can one will a domain name to an heir?" ==== CONTINUING ================= --== SEO Standards ==-- ~ Jere Matlock "I've been called in to do SEO analysis of a couple websites that Bruce's team had optimized..." ~ Shari Thurow "So herein lies the problem: what constitutes high standards and low standards?" --== New Trends in Checkouts ==-- ~ John Smart "Amazon amazes me with this - I always have a hard time finding the add to cart button..." ~ Jon Langley "Having the ability of putting a password to help protect my data makes sense." ~ Phil Chave "You're right, the web's gone password mad." --== The Blogspot Spam Epidemic ==-- ~ Will Bontrager "Spamcop is not the answer." ==== BULLETIN BOARD ============= --== Web Marketing Assoc. Web Awards ==-- ~ William Rice ========== NEW =================================== From: Dan Rosenfield Subject: Putting Domains in a Will? (and another question) Here's a little different kind of question. How can one will a domain name to an heir? Must some arrangement be made with one's domain name registrar? Now, a more mundane question. Can anyone recommend a good article on website marketing via social media? Thanks, Dan Rosenfield Comment? <Moderator Comment> Interesting one, Dan. This discussion will be new ground for me. By the way, here are some good resources for social media marketing: 1) "The Five Pillars of Social Media Marketing" http://www.marketingpilgrim.com/2006/10/the-five-pillars... 2) "Social Media Marketing Tactics" http://www.seomoz.org/article/social-media-marketing-tactics -Adam ======== CONTINUING =============================== From: Jere Matlock Subject: SEO standards > ... If I'm in business, do I want to place my business web > site in the hands of a no-standards web page optimizer > or do I hire a high-standards web page optimizer? ... And, > yes, am lookin' for a <highest standards> SEO (if you will). > Know of any? - Al Toman, LED Digest 2389 - http://www.led-digest.com/content/view/1792/55/ I know of a few. Not to slight anyone else: one that I've respected for years is Bruce Clay, whose site is currently #6 at Google in a search for the holy grail of search terms, "search engine optimization". Bruce and his team don't just talk about SEO, they do SEO well enough to rank their own site on the first page at Google for that elusive search term. This quote from Bruce's site is helpful in understanding the "higher standards" approach to search engine optimization: ----------------- "It is not the job of Search Engine Optimization to make a pig fly. It is the job of the SEO to genetically re-engineer the website so that it becomes an eagle." ----------------- If you check random pages of Bruce's site, such as this one: http://www.bruceclay.com/seo-tech-tips/techtips.htm, you'll find that they validate through the HTML validator service. Curiously, the CSS on that page doesn't validate, perhaps because the search engines pay little or no attention to CSS. If HTML validation weren't important for SEO (in Bruce's opinion), would he have it in place on his own website? Prob'ly not. Speaking for myself, I know that if I didn't think HTML code validation important for SEO, I wouldn't have bothered to validate the HTML code throughout my own site -- that I did so should prove that it's a chore I consider worth doing. I've been called in after the fact to do an SEO analysis of a couple of websites that Bruce's team had optimized, to see if anything else could or should be done to optimize it. This request was from a client I had referred to Bruce a couple of years earlier. My client has a site that ranks well in an industry where the top ranking is worth millions of dollars per year. Understandably, he wants to be #1, not #3. In that analysis I found things that I would do to optimize a site that hadn't been done. That said, Bruce's team does what he recommends on his site, and doesn't appear to take any major shortcuts. I commend their workmanship and attention to detail -- they do a first class job of SEO. I only found a couple of things worth doing to improve their SEO job from two years ago. Other sites I've analyzed that were "optimized" by less reputable SEO firms were (putting it mildly) severely lacking in the basics of SEO. While writing that last sentence a referral called me who had had her website "optimized" in January of this year. Whereupon her site went from the bottom of page 1 of Google's SERPs to page 9, where it currently resides. A preliminary inspection (just asking some questions and digging around) discovered that all her old page names were changed at that time without any 301 permanent redirects being put in place from the old page names to the new. So all her old high-ranking pages had basically been removed by her last SEO firm. In summary, as with so many other things in the free world, with SEO it's "caveat emptor". (Latin for "let the buyer beware"). If you are a buyer looking for a "higher standards" SEO firm, you'd be well advised to do plenty of homework. Get referrals from the SEO firms you are considering; ask to speak with some of last year's customers. If they won't give you any referrals, walk away. Contact the referrals you get. Determine for yourself if the SEO work done was "genetic re-engineering" that resulted in an eagle of a website -- a long-lasting rise in SE rankings -- or if it was just someone gluing wings onto that pig. Best, Jere Matlock http://www.wordsinarow.com Website Design & Marketing / SEO Comment? -------- new post - same topic -------- From: Shari Thurow Subject: SEO standards Hi all- This is in response to the discussion thread on SEO and Web standards. I've been out of the country and our family lost my precious grandmother after my return. So please pardon my lack of contributions recently, Adam. So, standards. I know that I am a very opinionated person, and this is one topic I am extremely opinionated about. Though my perspective might be quite different from others' perspectives. One of my career goals is to bring search-friendly design and search marketing as a whole into the formal education system, beginning with adult education, mostly colleges and universities. That is why I've written my book and am almost finished making the final edits on the 2nd edition. It's one of the main reasons why I lecture on the topic. It is the main reason I am in graduate school, though I have to admit that I have always liked school. I want there to be legitimacy and credibility to our field. Any search engine marketer knows -- what we do? It works. Imagine my surprise when I was a Microsoft Search Champ to see some of my black-hat colleagues who I do NOT consider to be search experts by any stretch of the imagination. Search experts have technical skills as well as creative skills. If a search expert has one skill and not the other? Well, my personal opinion is that you are not a search expert. You might have a niche in the SEO / SEM industry, but a search expert has a breadth of knowledge. Expert implies a higher level of learning and understanding. And then, imagine my further surprise to be insulted by the very person who was actually quite helpful to me (because I was just beginning my graduate program). In her blog, she lumped me in with the black hats. Now, anyone who searches for my name and does a little reading knows that I am probably the brightest white-hat on the planet. When I began my graduate program, most of my classmates had the same assumption. Black hats were and are giving our field a bad reputation in the academic arena. I have read many articles in library and info science journals that contain outright incorrect information about the commercial Web search engines and "ethical" SEO. My professors keep telling me to publish and refute these article claims. So herein lies the problem: what constitutes high standards and low standards? I believe that the core of search optimization lies in user-centered design, something that few SEOs understand or want to understand. User-centered design and the organization of information is taught at major universities. I can see search optimization added to curricula, realistically. However, with black hats polluting the search environment, it makes my career and academic goals far more difficult to achieve. And who's to say that my standards should be standards? I'm hardly objective about my own standards -- of course I agree with them. I believe we need standards. I don't see SEO standards being established any time soon because black hats make too much money doing what they do. I've terminated many contracts (from big brands, too) because I will not exploit the search engines. Believe me, ethics fly out the window when money is involved. My 2 cents. I would love to hear from others who have different perspectives. Sincerely, Shari Thurow, Marketing Director http://www.grantasticdesigns.com/tips.html Comment? ============ Sponsor Message =========== Ever wonder why Presidents and board chairmen hire professional writers to craft their speeches? Because they're usually trying to sell something, be it a new federal program or a lame excuse for a lousy fourth quarter. You're in sales, too. Online sales. Your site needs words that sell, power words. http://GetWebContent.com/LED words. ============ Sponsor Message =========== -------- new post - new topic -------- From: John Smart Subject: Checkout > I've noticed a 'new' trend in checkouts these days. It seems > that you can't complete the transaction without registering an > e-mail and a password. This is NOT the way to carry on. > PLEASE, all designers reading this take note. - Roy Williams, LED Digest 2389 - http://www.led-digest.com/content/view/1792/55/ Thank you Roy, I will use your post to educate clients. The cart I wrote has three closing options. No account - it just gets your payment details and process them account or no account; As above - or if you want, you can create an account (and if you lose your password, it will happily mail you a copy); Account only - you have to have an account. I did not want to write it that way, but I had to because of shop-owner demand. I have tried explaining this to them, but, well, the customer is always right. Sometimes belligerent, annoying, arrogant and ill-informed, but always right! Amazon amazes me with this - I always have a hard time finding the add to cart button on the book pages - You would think that they know what they are doing! Kindest regards John Smart InternetDesign.com A Human Touch in a Digital world. Comment? -------- new post - same topic -------- From: Jon Langley Subject: Checkouts Most people that are setting up new websites these days, are going for "Low Cost" options. Open source sites. Like OSCommerce, CRE-Loaded and Zen-cart. All of those are pretty much free or low cost. (CRELoaded can be free, or enhancements can be purchased). As standard, these sites come with a "Email and password" system. IMHO, I like the idea. Having the ability of putting a password to help protect my data makes sense. I never know if I may come back, But I don't use what I call a high security password. But, I know that at least one of them allows you to add an add-on so that the buyer does not have to register. Although I also happen to know that should you forget your "rubbish" password, you can re-request or reset it. Our store doesn't require passwords. We are looking at upgrading and I know the new system can either have a password system or provide a choice. Which I know that I will be going for the choice option. Re Visa and Mastercard secure code. From a sellers POV, it is going to be a lot more safer. But yes, as a buyer, I also agree that it is going to be a right PITA. This is one of those areas that companies like Paypal, Google Checkout, Nochex would benefit. Paypal has alas had some bad press. But then when you consider the amount of carp emails that scammers send out, they far out weigh (for me anyway) the amount of Viagra and Barclays Bank mails. But can I also point out that the securecode / verified bit is being forced upon sellers. We are almost at the point of we either have it, or we can't take those cards. If you want the option of using Visa or Mastercard, you either sign up to Paypal etc. or put up with it. Talking of which, a bit of news for those that may be interested. Google have released Google Checkout UK... This now means that sellers from UK can start implementing Google checkout on UK sites. But it also means that if your SF is set up that way, US can sell to UK and visa versa. Rumour has it that Germany is next in the list. So if you have programmers currently looking at Google Checkout, make sure that they make it a bit more versatile between countries. things like Currency needs to be a variable and Ship to Countries need to be sent... Jon Langley Jons All Sorts http://www.jons-all-sorts.co.uk Comment? -------- new post - same topic -------- From: Phil Chave Subject: Checkout I agree with you Roy. I now have a new A-Z address book, double the size of the old one, which is now full of web addresses, usernames and passwords. Every bank (4), book site (3), other site purchase (numerous), affiliate program (24), email company (12), share dealing (1), forums (18), medical site (4), car enthusiast site (2), holiday site (3), web stats (15), software purchases and reg codes (numerous), the list goes on and on and on. How is anybody supposed to remember any of this stuff? Everytime I want to do anything, I have to get the book out. If you don't write it down, it's lost, and if you do, you're liable for losses incurred through supposed neglect on your part. If anybody got hold of this, I'd feel, well, quite exposed and vulnerable. Consequently I keep it in the safe, or take it with me when I go anywhere. Now that "we have the technology", perhaps it would be better to implant a chip just under the skin, behind my ear, or somewhere. I could 'upload' all these things to the chip and not have to write it down anywhere. Access would be by some newly acquired tic on one side of the face. You're right, the web's gone password mad. Regards Phil Chave - Blagdon, nr Bristol, UK Comment? -------- new post - new topic -------- From: Will Bontrager Subject: Blogspot spam > Blogspot.com is quickly becoming a favourite hosting site > for the spammers... Worse, Google ignores email-based > spam complaints and refuses to accept Spamcop reports. - Quoted by James Miller, LED Digest 2389 - http://www.led-digest.com/content/view/1792/55/ Good for Google. No, I don't like spammers. They are disgusting boils on humanity's hiney. Neither is my intent to bolster Google's goodwill. Possibly unlike most, I'm getting somewhat uneasy about Google's rapid accumulation of information and my realizations about what they could accomplish with it. However, Spamcop is not the answer. Past experiences with Spamcop have been in relation to the weekly Possibilities ezine. Once in a while, I publish articles with effective anti-spam techniques. Examples are blocking spam, preventing email address harvesting, and eliminating form spam. For a while, every time I published an anti-spam article, Spamcop would blacklist us. I'm not saying Spamcop intentionally did this. I think what happened is a spammer on our subscription list got pissed when I wrote such an article and reported the issue as spam. Spamcop did not take the responsibility of verifying the reported email was indeed spam. It seemed the fact of the report was good enough, that if anyone thought an email was spam then it must of course be spam. After about 6 months of anti-spam article = blacklist, I just stopped paying attention to Spamcop. Allowing an entity with a history of irresponsibility determine what is and is not spam would be somewhat unbalanced, in my opinion. Good for Google. Will Bontrager http://willmaster.com/ Comment? ==== BULLETIN BOARD =============================== From: William Rice Subject: Web Marketing Association WebAwards If you haven't heard by now, the Web Marketing Association has begun the 2007 Call for Entries for the 11th annual international WebAward competition. Web sites from all over the world will compete for the right to be called Best Web Site in 96 different industries. For complete information, go to www.2007webaward.org. Deadline for entry is Mat 31st. William Rice Comment? ------------------------------------------------------- The LED Digest is sponsored by GetWebContent.com The Web's Most Experienced SEO Content Providers. Free no-obligation proposal: http://GetWebContent.com/LED The Archives: http://www.led-digest.com/content/view/126/120/ Subscribe: http://www.led-digest.com/content/view/52/77/ Unsubscribe, Change Email, or Hold / Resume Delivery: http://www.led-digest.com/content/category/4/17/86/ (c) Copyright 1995-2007 Orange Wheel, LLC. All Rights Reserved. ----------------------------------------------------------------- "Once we make our decision, all things will come to us. Auspicious signs are not a superstition, but a confirmation. They are a response." - Deng Ming-Dao |
