Silly Stupid SEO

[morestar]

Thanks for the post LD:

I like Jill's response to the emails about "search engine submissions":

"I honestly can't believe that there could still be, in 2011, someone who would speak to an audience on any form of
Internet marketing who would recommend submitting to search engines, let alone one that would recommend spending $99 (or
even 10 cents) a month to do so. In fact, it enrages me. That person who spoke must be a sales rep for that [submission tool]
company, and he or she should be thrown out of the business and not allowed to speak on the topic ever again."

I'm bookmarking this thread and sharing it for future reference - the very near future to be honest...

[morestar]

While I know that some will reject that article out of hand owing to the author, it's really spot on, particularly the part about the blind leading the blind on many forums.

So I'm reading further on. I wouldn't dare insult and say she's not a successful SEO but I could say her mockery isn't too spot on...

Another one of my pet peeves that has been common since the beginning of SEO time. Just because you changed the positioning of a word in your title tag and the next day you ranked one place higher in Google doesn't mean that your change is what caused it. It may have, but it may not have.

We used to joke on the High Rankings Forum (highrankings.com/forum/) that if you keep a cabbage on your monitor it will increase your rankings. Why not? It's as likely as some of the silly SEO theories that are based on poorly drawn conclusions that mix up cause and effect.

She ties in "SEO theories" with facts and common SEO practices. We do KNOW that changing the title tag of your pages can influence you're rankings, up or down. According to this years Search Engine Ranking Factors report, the top 5 ranking factors, Keyword Use in the Title Tag came out in second. Cabbage on your monitor didn't even make the cut.

So at best, she's (Jill) asking (in the above quote) for SEO's not to come into her forum as say "hey, I changed the keywords in my title and my rankings went up" because they "may have" or "may not have"?

I see no point to that quote, but correct me if I'm wrong...

[LD]

Thanks for the post LD:

I thought it was a good topic and figured although it might not get too much action, those that are in effect part of the topic (propagating opinions as truths), might get the hint to think before typing.

In terms of SE submission, I still do it as part of the service, but in time perhaps, I just might omit that step. I wonder if submission is still worth doing if it's a brand new domain and site being launched? In other words do the on-page steps, then the submssion, and finally apply other off-page strategies. I'm usually waiting for $ for the a next step in the process, so I just submit the sites anyhow. The clients usually like seeing the report too!

What do you think about a new domain/site and SE submission - worth doing?

[morestar]

In terms of SE submission, I still do it as part of the service, but in time perhaps, I just might omit that step. I wonder if submission is still worth doing if it's a brand new domain and site being launched? In other words do the on-page steps, then the submssion, and finally apply other off-page strategies. I'm usually waiting for $ for the a next step in the process, so I just submit the sites anyhow. The clients usually like seeing the report too!

What do you think about a new domain/site and SE submission - worth doing?

Well I never worry about search engine submissions, my sites get picked up pretty quick - although when I concern myself with some other search engines, then I'll submit the sites there...

I still do directory submissions because it doesn't take long to do the job with good software and even if I get only a portion of the links to actually have effect, that's still good, you know what I mean...

[LD]

Well I never worry about search engine submissions, my sites get picked up pretty quick - although when I concern myself with some other search engines, then I'll submit the sites there...

Makes sense. I just blast them out to about 75 NA and other inernational SEs anyhow.

I still do directory submissions because it doesn't take long to do the job with good software and even if I get only a portion of the links to actually have effect, that's still good, you know what I mean...

Yes, I know what you mean. I'm having a little trouble justifying these submissions lately because with quite a large number of successful submissions in the last 2-4 months, most, if not all of those successful submissions are still not showing up in GWT. And GWT usually shows thousands of extraneous and minor IBLs that the SEs or even using other data mining tools, don't dig up.

I duno, maybe I'm just impatient.

[deepsand]

So I'm reading further on. I wouldn't dare insult and say she's not a successful SEO but I could say her mockery isn't too spot on...



She ties in "SEO theories" with facts and common SEO practices. We do KNOW that changing the title tag of your pages can influence you're rankings, up or down. According to this years Search Engine Ranking Factors report, the top 5 ranking factors, Keyword Use in the Title Tag came out in second. Cabbage on your monitor didn't even make the cut.

So at best, she's (Jill) asking (in the above quote) for SEO's not to come into her forum as say "hey, I changed the keywords in my title and my rankings went up" because they "may have" or "may not have"?

I see no point to that quote, but correct me if I'm wrong...

She is addressing the fact that very, very few have even heard of, let alone know how to do multivariate testing; which, when dealing with an algorithm having 200+ input variables, most of which are publicly unidentified, only one, PageRank, has had its means of determination revealed, and none of the coefficients are known, is an absolute necessity for determining causality.

The overwhelming majority, as is continually evidenced on this forum, assume that any correlation demonstrates a cause and effect relationship, thus leading to fallacious conclusions.

Away and by far, this is the greatest and most common mistake made by so-called SEOs.

[morestar]

The overwhelming majority, as is continually evidenced on this forum, assume that [b]any[b] correlation demonstrates a cause and effect relationship, thus leading to fallacious conclusions.

Away and by far, this is the greatest and most common mistake made by so-called SEOs.

In laymen's terms please...

[deepsand]

Meaning that just because you snapped your fingers moments before the bolt of lightening appeared doesn't mean you have supernatural powers.

[morestar]

Meaning that just because you snapped your fingers moments before the bolt of lightening appeared doesn't mean you have supernatural powers.

and so with that, I don't really see the correlation between what you said and Jill's statements - the act of editing one's title can affect rankings. What am I not reading right there?

(P.S. I have nothing against Jill, I think she's a brilliant SEO writer)...

[deepsand]

That one altered the Title and observed a subsequent change in SERP rank does not necessarily mean that the former was the cause of the latter.

Jill's point was that too many wrongly make the assumption that an observed correlation evidences a causal relationship.