| LED Digest 1928: What is RSS? |
|
|
|
================================================== 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 adam,led-digest.com http://www.led-digest.com ............................................... February 3, 2005 Issue #1928 ............................................... .....IN THIS DIGEST..... ====== NEW ====================== --== RSS Feeds ==-- ~ Nancy Cardinali "I wondered if this might be an interesting thread..." ==== CONTINUING ================= --== Sacking SpamCop ==-- ~ Chris Nielsen "Legal action directed toward Spamcop is mis-guided and will fail." ~ Mark Collins "The validity of anything Bill Davison had to say was certainly questionable." --== The Google Rankings Thread ==-- ~ Emma Leigh "I think it also depends whether you have a .com or a country-specific (eg .co.uk) domain." ~ James Miller "So it would appear that Google searches on a page-by-page basis..." --== Dream Affiliate Programs ==-- ~ Kathryn Martyn "It seems more like you are the one refusing to budge." ==== BILLBOARD =================== --== PHP Concerns ==-- ~ Paul Bedford ~ Bob Gladstein ~ Tom Aman ======= NEW ===================================== From: Nancy Cardinali Subject: RSS Feeds Hi All, I don't know much about RSS feeds, but it seems this is something we should get some information about. In Issue 1926 Joe Halbrook has a link for templates. I have yet to do a thorough look at this page / site, so I apologize for that. Also, maybe I missed an issue that addressed this. I wondered if this might be an interesting thread... Blogs, RSS... What is RSS and how can we, as web designers, use it to our advantage? Thanks Nancy Cardinali nancy52,cwo.com ===== CONTINUING ================================= From: Chris Nielsen Subject: SpamCop > Recent problems and recent internet posts beg for someone > in the legal profession to take SpamCop to the cleaners... Even > their counterparts at CAUCE have flogged their conduct. - Bill Davison, LED 1927 While I no longer user SPAMCOP to report spammers, since they would not allow me to include researched information that uncovered spammer's attempts to hide, I still think they provide a valuable service, and are the only ones that I am aware of that are really doing something to address the problem in a realistic manner. You can medicate and treat the symptoms all you want, but if you don't treat the disease directly, it will never go away. Spam blockers and filters and white lists are great, but they are not a cure for spam. Direct reporting to ISPs and system admins that document open proxies and accounts used by spammers are generally very effective. I took great satisfaction getting an occasional email from and ISP that informed me of an account being closed. It is my understanding that SPAMCOP does the reporting and may create the blacklist, but they don't block anyone's email. If the system is flawed, then it is the system admins that are using the blacklist that are at fault. In my opinion, they are the ones that can drive change at SPAMCOP, and they should feel the heat if they are using a flawed system. Legal action directed toward SPAMCOP, in my non-lawyer opinion, is mis-guided and will fail. It would make more sense to direct feedback to system operators that use the blacklists and also the company that has taken over SPAMCOP. I doubt that SPAMCOP is a big enough money maker that the company wants to be publicly connected with a system that is flawed and has been shown to cause big problems for those unlucky enough to have been wrongly blacklisted. I would guess that if 10% of the people that use some kind of anti-spam methods used SPAMCOP reporting that spam would be decreasing, and not constantly increasing. ISP reporting has been proven to be effective in controlling spam, but until all spam is reported things are really not going to change very much. Thank you, Chris Nielsen www.seoby.org ------- new post - same topic -------- From: Mark W. Collins Subject: SpamCop The validity of anything Bill Davison had to say was certainly questionable. You would think after reading [his comments] that there is some recent news of note to be concerned with. Bills quoting old "comments" posted to the CAUCE discussion list, "Date: Mon, 4 Nov 2002 11:43:22 -0800" and titled: "Politech incorrectly blocked by SpamCop -- for the third time" Date: Mon, 4 Nov 2002 11:43:22 -0800 Bill continues to make various allegations after this none of which are substantiated. I have to seriously question anyone who spouts off like this for the most part making unsubstantiatiated statements and when he does try to substantiatiate a statement he's made uses comments (over 2 yrs old) from an internet discussion list as "FACT" Mark Collins ------- new post - new topic -------- From: Emma Leigh Subject: Google > I didn't realise that country returns in Google very much > depend on where your site is hosted... but it doesn't > affect the international Google returns... - Dirk van der Werff, LED 1927 I think it also depends whether you have a .com or a country-specific (eg .co.uk) domain. Dot com domains might be seen as "international" and so less relevant to a particular country, co.uk would be seen as more relevant to a UK audience and placed accordingly? If you have a .com redirecting to a .co.uk, perhaps this still looks like an international site redirecting to a local one and so less relevant than a purely local site ( or like an attempt to con better results, even if it isn't the case!) Emma Leigh ------- new post - same topic ------- From: James Miller Subject: Google Watching www.celiamiller.com in the search engine over the last few days has been interesting. Index.html was searched by Google on 12 and 28 Jan, then the pages linked to it were searched on 30 Jan. The next level of linking does not appear to have been searched yet. So it would appear that Google searches on a page-by-page basis, rather than a site-by-site basis. I shall be checking the next level. Still not in images yet! James Miller Daisy Analysis: www.daisy.co.uk ------- new post - new topic -------- From: Kathryn Martyn Subject: Dream affiliate > Your inflexibility means I don't do business with you. No > rationalization or personal research will change that fact. - Michael Martinez, LED 1927 That's a curious way to phrase it. Their inflexibility? It seems more like you are the one refusing to budge. You want what you want, and you're gonna get it, by golly, and that's fine, but when a site owner, successful beyond most of our wildest dreams such as Ken Evoy offers real insights into the precise hows, whys and wherefores of a successful affiliate arrangement, I tend to perk up my ears, pull my chair a bit closer and listen to what he has to say. I might learn something. You can certainly choose with whom to do business, but I'd at least consider that Evoy knows the affiliate business hands down. He's freely giving his insights into the mind and pocketbook of the marketer. He also has real evidence of a successful affiliate model. That's hard to ignore. Visitors to your site will return time and again if you give them what they want, and frankly, you can't give them everything. Sometimes it's another site or business that fills their needs, and you are offering to lead them there -- that's what an affiliate is paying you to do, lead them visitors who turn into clients. Win, win. Your visitors return to your site because you fill a need and they trust you to follow your links to other goods and services. Again, it's win / win. Maybe what you are seeking in an affiliate relationship is simply different than what the typical affiliate seller has to offer, or maybe your have other reasons for wanting to keep your site's visitors on a short leash. Kathryn Martyn, M.NLP Ending Emotional Eating, One Bite at a Time http://www.onemorebite-weightloss.com ==== BILLBOARD =================================== From: Paul Bedford Subject: PHP SEO > I have been told I can use PHP... to 'hold' things that > go on every page in a web site, such as top & bottom > navigation, logos... whatever, making changes easier. - Nancy Cardinali, LED 1927 Yes you can with PHP, ASP, Server Side Includes and others. This is especially useful for those things that are consistent across a site like footers etc. Should it then become necessary to make a change or an addition to that part of each page, only one file needs to be edited as opposed to making the same change on every page of your site (both boring and time consuming). > Assuming this is possible, would this > be okay for search engines? Any of the files that are included into the page you wish to display are processed by the server before being outputted to the browser / search engine spider. What this means is that the spider will see (X)HTML including all your navigation, header, footer, etc just as if it was a plain (X)HTML page being served. Exactly how to do it depends on your server configuration, languages available etc. Regards, Paul Bedford -------- new post - same topic -------- From: Bob Gladstein Subject: PHP SEO Hi Nancy. You're talking about server-side includes. You build your navigation, copyright notice, etc. as a separate file, and then you insert code into each of your pages telling the server to add the code from that file. What a user (including a search engine spider) will see will be the full page, with the included content in there as a normal part of the code. So it's no problem at all, and it's incredibly convenient. One change to a single file will automatically change every page that includes that file. Bob Gladstein, SEO Consultant Raise My Rank Services www.raisemyrank.com -------- new post - same topic -------- From: Tom Aman Subject: PHP SEO Makes no difference where the navigation links (or whatever) are stored on the server or how they are generated - could be one file or 50 files. What matters is what the server actually sends in response to the URL for the item - i.e. if it is all sent together as a single page, a spider can deal with it. Bear in mind that the spider is really no different than a browser - it makes an HTTP request and deals with the result. (If you want to see what I mean, download WebBug at http://www.cyberspyder.com/webbug.html - this will let you see the actual page as a spider would see it). This also points out a problem re Javascript links. These links only work if the browser actually supports and has Javascript enabled. I would suspect that many (all??) spiders do not handle Javascript, hence Javascript links would not be followed by the spider. Tom Aman Aman Software http://www.cyberspyder.com ------------------------------------------------------- The LED Digest is sponsored by pair Networks: pair.com for Hosting | pairNIC.com for Domains © Copyright 1995-2004 Adam Audette. All Rights Reserved. ----------------------------------------------------------------- "Nearly all men can stand adversity, but if you want to test a man's character, give him power." - Abraham Lincoln |
