New on LowEndTalk? Please Register and read our Community Rules.
All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
Comments
My best clean site with useful content and without any seo trick got penalized by google and was thrown from top 3 in ranking to 10th page on search results and on the other side another site of mine where i used all the black hat seo tricks just for practice is still ranked high and doing well after years and no issues at all. So Google need to first make sure their system works properly instead of penalizing random clean sites while taking no action against some bad sites
Then please go complain to Google about that. Stop polluting the web - the whole reason Google even needs to penalize anything, is because of bullshit like this thread.
And frankly, if search traffic is a significant factor for your website, then you should really consider whether you're actually providing the value to people that you think you are. Because if you were, it would spread by word of mouth, and you wouldn't need to rely on search rankings.
How do you think the web grew to its current state? "Thought leaders" sitting in their bedroom?
Very naive.
Yes i am providing users what they want i am not giving them any duplicate content or ad farm or blah blah. I did used seo tricks for this site of mine in beginning but i am also delivering the content to users so not disappointing them at all and for your information i have regular users and my ratio is 60% returning visitors and 40% new visitors from search/other sources etc for that site.
So 60% returning users can't be wrong or maybe they like bullshit as you mentioned in your post?
There are ways Google could mitigate it, but there's always collateral damage on the scale of the web, e.g. people accidentally forgetting to renew a domain, people buying/selling websites.
So stop trying to use SEO tricks, then. Clearly you don't need them.
PR is an outdated metric.
If you're going to draw the "this is what makes the web" card, then maybe you should read up on the actual history of the web itself. Hint: it's built on technologies developed through volunteer efforts. Have a read here for example, or here for a historical perspective on development of the web and the internet in general.
The only notable 'corporate' contribution to the web that didn't make the quality of the web deteroriate was Google, and even that spawned as a university research project (and has indeed grown progressively more toxic to the web as it has turned more corporate).
So please, take your indignant "without us commercial types you wouldn't have a web" bullshit elsewhere. You've only contributed to its demise, from a quality and usability POV. Get the hell off my internet.
Of course, "naive". Yet apparently you are unable to motivate exactly what is naive about it - rather interesting, given that Google itself states that SEO fuckery is why penalizing has to happen in the first place.
Best ranking advice that can be given is to write beautiful html/css that works perfectly on mobile platforms, is delivered over tls, loads in less than 5 seconds, and is exactly what your users or customers are explicitly asking for. Google's ranking algorithm changes, new versions, and all the other changes SEO people track are leading in one direction, which is Google giving your users what they want even if that's not exactly what they asked for. This is something completely lost on SEO people, it seems.
(This gets into hairy territory since it's kinda creepy, etc -- but if your job is to ensure you're ranked highly, you would do well to actually serve your users' interests.)
I have had fairly steady access so the web since the mid-nineties. That's roughly when you were born, right?
Even more so then, and still now, a large proportion of referrals are from search engine traffic. That's how the average person finds things.
Do you think the web would be what it is today if the web wasn't essentially a marketplace to sell goods? How did Google afford the infrastructure and expertise they have today? Oh, adwords... those lucrative pieces of text in search engine results? ah. Seems like an opportunity, doesn't it.
Very amusing. We could go back to the 90s where it's $5 / hour for access and because there's no economy of scale to the web and no customers, no investment and sadly for you, no wordpress installations to hack
The money was here before you were anyway.
Anyways, whatever spammers are throwing at Google improves its algo, much like people like yourself... err ... damaging things to make a point about security or policy. That's how things evolve.
Aside from your all kinds of wrong, what you need to understand is that when you type in "buy life insur-ance" into Google, the #1 spot is worth a lot of money. Google's algorithm isn't perfect either. Unless you have some kind of formulae for a "universal truth" or " who is more deserving of the #1 spot " or a better way of life than capitalism, I'd suggest you're in the wrong thread and should piss off back to what you usually do. And aside from that, get the hell off your soapbox and being so rude. SEO is a multi-billion dollar industry yet you're pretentious enough to be above it all. Grow up and stop derailing threads.
Refer to comment about universal truth. That seems to be a topic you think you've nailed (at a young age
)
And since when did "being around" translate into "understanding the foundations"? Your statements are still just as wrong.
Sure. And you don't need to 'optimize' for that. If your thing is the thing that people are looking for, then they will find it. "SEO" only serves you, not the user.
No, it wouldn't, and that would likely be for the better. The "web" (in the conceptual sense, not the technological sense) of today is primarily a cesspool of commercial interests trying to screw over whoever they can to make a fucking buck. Average quality of content has only declined, and continues to decline. I think I can do without that.
Yep, that was the decision that Google made. After which things quickly went to shit. Surely you're not suggesting that this being Google's decision, no other choices were available, right?
Seriously? Personal attacks? And do you have even the slighest clue what I do on the internet?
Whatever gets the highest score on a standard relevance algorithm belongs in #1. Very simple.
Oh yes, a multi-billion dollar industry of sleazebags destroying the web. I'll stop being rude when you stop polluting the web with "SEO" bullshit. Fair deal, no?
Respect is earned, not demanded.
Oh great, personal attacks and age discrimination? Please, learn how to have a fucking discussion.
"personal attacks". You're gatecrashing a thread about SEO/search engines and rubbishing anyone and anything associated with it. You're on a high horse.
LOL. You don't understand the power & competitive pressures involving search engine results. Let's just leave it at that. When you can further your argument further than "money bad", maybe you can add something constructive. Otherwise, you're on the wrong thread.
Failing that, go build a new search engine, a non-profit one. I'll look forward to your "standard relevance algorithm".
Yes. Have a list:
If you genuinely have a point, you don't need to make such fallacious stabs.
Absolutely. Because anything associated with it is destroying the web. Very simple. There is no such thing as 'legitimate' SEO - all of it is destructive, and purely for own gain.
I guess you missed the part where I said that SEO is altogether evil. But of course, "you just don't understand it" is the easiest way to pretend to be right, without having any actual arguments of substance to offer.
You're the last person in this thread in a position to complain about 'furthering arguments' - you have consistently been ignoring the arguments and responses of mine that you don't feel you can easily 'refute'.
lol, these guys calling Google racist for not approving them.. while in other threads they admit to using garbage like Hitleap. Maybe the 3rd world can work together and clean up its image? outlaw hitleap, jingling and all the other monkeyshines they got going.
You don't have an argument Joepie, you have an opinion. It's just your ego equates it to truth.
Whine like a little boy about age discrimination
I gave you a suggestion to elaborate on how you'd rank search engine results and you took the easy path out. It's a more complicated matter than the 5 minutes you've thought about it. I don't mind replying but TBH I don't think I'm going to get anything useful out of you other than amusement.
FWIW one of the older member of an SEO forum I used to frequent sold his website today. It's a dating website. To begin with he created fake profiles & bought links to increase his ranking. Now it's one of the world's most popular websites & sold for half a billion dollars. Perhaps it's also the place thousands of people started a relationship? I wonder if the "standard relevancy algorithm" would have resulted in the same outcome?
Anyways, "good" and "useful" and "relevancy" are subjective. The subject area is huge. Google has hundreds of PhD's on the problem. Poor you, age discrimination...
Distributed content that's not centrally owned. I know you hate stuff like that. Oh wait...
Ignorance is bliss.
why you don't ask it on BHW?