With so much drama in the L B C it's kinda hard being Snoop D O double G,
But somehow someway, I...
stevesh:
Your attitude toward RodG, one of the most helpful members of the forum, guarantees that I won't inadvertently expose the URL of your top-secret website, either, as I won't be reading your posts.
Now that truly is a shame. Over the years I have benefited from your help many, many times. Sometimes directly (you reading a post, then offering a solution to a problem), but more often indirectly (a search of the forum about my issue leading to a thread someone else posted, then you came along and solved it for them).
Now that you have rebuked me, I feel I owe an explanation, lest I end up looking like a tool. I do hope you actually read this Stevesh because I like you, I think you are a force of good in these forums, and I don't want you to be mad at me.
REGARDING MY "attitude toward RodG"
Rod and I have a history. He referenced that history by bringing up an old experiment that played out here in the ZC forums. I had started a thread to discuss (if memory serves) a best order of operations about setting up a store (what to install first, second, so on). The discussion got sidetracked into vigorous conversation about SEO. It garnered a lot of attention and a lot of interesting stuff came out of it, one of which was an experiment during which several individuals took the same unique search term, placed it on their websites, and then applied dif SEO strategies in an attempt to find out which strategies caused pages to rank higher than the others.
This was fun and interesting, but ultimately became combative to the point of being sill. If memory serves, the mods eventually buried it because it got out of hand.
When I say Rod was measured and found wanting, that was what I referenced. Most of us were in the experiment to test ideas. Others were in it to PROVE preconceptions. When those conceptions didn't pan out, we were all subjected to windy rants about how what we could see with our own eyes was incorrect.
HOW IS THIS THREAD DIFFERENT FROM THE OTHER?
Last time I was just curious about other peoples strategies. This time I have an actual problem and I was looking ideas about how to solve it.
WHAT SET ME OFF LAST NIGHT
One of the issues that caused major friction during that experiment is that I would post links with (DOT) being replaced with "." and then Rod would come along and deliberately repost the link in the clear. I had to request mods to edit his posts, just as I will now.
I'm not some bully who just randomly decided to go off on poor innocent Rod last night.
Rod deliberately picked a fight with me by intentionally (malice of forethought) pressing buttons he knew would set me off.
My response may have been overly abrasive or tad too rough, but it was certainly clear. I have no use for him and want him to leave me alone.
REGARDING PRIVACY
I didn't bother to respond to Rod's points about privacy because it is a discussion he and I have had so he knows exactly why I post links the way I do. Contrary to his insinuations, I am actually in touch with reality.
Of course these forum conversations are public. If they were not, I wouldn't be here. This is an excellent resource that helps a lot of people. There are a lot of smart people up here who volunteer their time helping others. I have nothing but respect for those of you who find the time to be so helpful.
And I have found my own way to contribute, however small it may be. If you look at any of the threads I start, you will see that I usually pose a problem. Once a solution is discovered, I come back and post step-by-step directions to solving the issue for the next guy (if another member has not posted it already).
What you don't know is that I'm impatient. Often I don't have the time to wait for a solution so I will go out and pay someone to write some code or otherwise solve the problem. Then I come back and post that solution right out in public to help the next guy.
REGARDING LINKS
Of course link backs are a good thing when it comes to SEO! If you know anything about the origin of Google, then you know why. The idea behind Google was that the more sites that point to a particular site via a hyperlink while using the same key words, the higher the relevance the site have to those words.
When Rod mocks me by saying he thought he was doing me a favor, that's what he is pointing out (I guess?).
Of course, Rod is technically correct. No argument there. If you want a site to climb SE ranks, the more links to the site, the better (usually).
SO WHY HIDE LINKS?
Rod already knows, so this is for your benefit Stevesh.
The best analogy I can think of is that of a man posting boudoir photos of his wife with her eyes blotted out. It's in a public forum so anybody can enjoy her, they just have to add a little effort to imagine her come-hither eyes. Or in this case, simply replace (DOT) with ".".
Yes, her identity could easily be sussed out by using clues in the background. And if a former lover happened to see the pic, he will immediately recognize that birthmark on her left breast. But the odds are long that one of her neighbors will ever see that image, let alone recognize her.
Yes, link-backs are generally a good thing when it comes to SEO. However, if those link-backs are associated open, public discussion of business strategies (in this case, SEO methods), then it's probably not the best idea.
Using my analogy, that would be like the husband not blurring his wife's eyes and, instead, adding her full name, an address, and an invitation that says: "Rape me. Please."
Even if he did that, I recognize that the odds of anything happening are pretty slim. Still, why take the chance?
Under normal circumstance, I love link-backs to my sites. But it's not in my interest to use links in the middle of conversations about business strategies, no matter how slim the odds are that the information might find it's way into a competitor's hands.
Silly? Maybe.
But does that give anybody the right to attack me personally? To photoshop my wife's eyes back into the image and then repost it?
LEST THERE BE ANY ILLUSIONS/DELUSIONS
Our poor, innocent hero, RodG, is, in fact, little more than a broken record filled with animosity toward anyone who disagrees with him, regardless of the veracity of the ideas Rod espouses. Worse, the man stubbornly continues to insist that his 8-track will eventually fit into my iPod.
Look at the amount of space he wasted to talk about keyword loading of URLs. Theoretically, that strategy may not have been PROVEN to positively affect ranking. However, it certainly has been proven that (correctly used, as mine are--despite the false assertion that my keywords do NOT appear in page content) it does not HURT your rankings. The end (for me, anyway).
If you seek SEO advice, be discerning about what you listen to. The loudest voice is not always the correct one.
My initial complaint (reason for this entire thread) was that my product pages (a year after being put up) are only showing up at the bottom of page 1 on google.
RodG correctly says that a search for my manufacturer yields over 75,000 results, then points out that: "That is a lot of competition. The fact that you are on page#1 is a result not to be sneezed at."
To him, perhaps. But to me, it's a crushing defeat. Given the amount of time that has passed, my SE rankings are typically above the manufacturers I distribute for.
Yes, you read that correctly.
Now ask yourself who you should listen to: an angry loudmouth with an ax to grind, or a guy who quietly goes about his business, occasionally seeking advice to better his skillz?
====
To anyone who may have been bothered by the manner in which I dispatched Rod, sorry. But what may have appeared as an over reaction to an innocent mistake was not, in fact, what happened.
I cannot begin to believe how much time I just wasted. FML. Thanks, Rod. Awesome as always, buddy.
