Bless the beasts, the children, and the SEOs
I was reading one of the more popular SEO "journal" Web sites this evening when I realized, for the umpteenth time, that most of the people involved in optimizing your Web pages so they'll rank highly in search engines are functionally illiterate.
It goes well beyond their collective inability to use basic English pronouns correctly (if I have to read "Myself, Dudley, and Studnot got together at the bar" one more time ...).
Okay, everyone makes typos while typing. I do it every time I create a message, blog post, Web page, or essay. And sometimes I even catch my typos before you see them. But I'm not talking about basic typos. I mean, these people don't know how to compose a sensible sentence in English.
What has happened to our education system? Are all the schools now hooked on phonics? I hope not.
Reading SEO blogs and feature articles is a real challenge. The experts all write like English is their second language. I can understand if you're sitting in a conference, blogging on your wireless laptop for the cheap-minded SEOs who don't want to waste -- er, spend a couple thousand dollars on a mutual back-patting weekend. I'll accept the typos, grammatical errors, and incomplete sentences because, frankly, if someone is willing to condense all the meaningless tripe and drivel you usually get from a panel to the relatively few points of worthwhile information, hey, that's worth a beer and even a "thank you" or two.
Thank you.
Pretty much, the rest of the SEO community's commentaries have lately been rather pointless. And repetitive. And boring. People are fumbling over the basics once again. Big name people who should know better by now.
How do you tell someone is a bad SEO? Let me count the ways:
They hint that Matt Cutts is a liar. What is up with all the Matt-bashing?
Is Matt always right? I have no idea. I don't work for Google, so I have no way to confirm or contest what he says. But he speaks with more authority on how Google does things than anyone who does NOT work for Google. So, whom should I believe has a clue: A Googler who has never been caught in a lie, or someone who keeps suggesting that the Googler is lying? Gee, that's a real tough choice, folks....
They talk about "quality links". What is a "quality link"? Even Adam Lasnik (a former SEO who now works with Matt Cutts at Google) has been caught saying, "More quality links". Hm. Frankly, when I want more links, I make them. I've been saying that for years. Only a handful of people have figured out what I mean, but they seem to be doing okay. Maybe there's something in my secret sauce after all.
But I don't spam blogs, I don't spam forums, and I don't run linkbots. Nor do I send out emails to people asking them to link to me. And if I did send out emails asking for links, I wouldn't write anything like:
You see, my definition of "arrogance" is more like: the act of coming unexpectedly out of nowhere without invitation or provocation to call someone else arrogant because you don't agree with what they say.
That's arrogance.
Yes, I'm in this business and, no, I don't have to tolerate link requests. I have zero-tolerance for link requests. I don't want them. I don't need them. You don't need them. That's right. Whoever wrote "incoming links are best way to boost sites ranking and traffic" only sees half the picture. Incoming links are useful. They are necessary. But you don't need an endless supply of incoming links.
If you've got dozens or hunderds of links and you're still not where you want to be, you need to stop link-building.
You ain't doing it right.
It's that simple. Anyone who says you need hundreds of links to promote a Web site, for most business categories, just absolutely has no idea of what they are talking about. I have moved into multiple highly competitive search expressions with fewer than 50 inbound links. If I can do it anyone can do it.
Well, this is getting long, and I've deleted more paragraphs than I have allowed to stand. I hope all the poor SEOs out there who are needlessly burning electrons took time out (if they are Americans) to celebrate Thanksgiving. We do all have a few things to be thankful for.
One of them is the next sentence. Bless your hearts, each and every one of them.
It goes well beyond their collective inability to use basic English pronouns correctly (if I have to read "Myself, Dudley, and Studnot got together at the bar" one more time ...).
Okay, everyone makes typos while typing. I do it every time I create a message, blog post, Web page, or essay. And sometimes I even catch my typos before you see them. But I'm not talking about basic typos. I mean, these people don't know how to compose a sensible sentence in English.
What has happened to our education system? Are all the schools now hooked on phonics? I hope not.
Reading SEO blogs and feature articles is a real challenge. The experts all write like English is their second language. I can understand if you're sitting in a conference, blogging on your wireless laptop for the cheap-minded SEOs who don't want to waste -- er, spend a couple thousand dollars on a mutual back-patting weekend. I'll accept the typos, grammatical errors, and incomplete sentences because, frankly, if someone is willing to condense all the meaningless tripe and drivel you usually get from a panel to the relatively few points of worthwhile information, hey, that's worth a beer and even a "thank you" or two.
Thank you.
Pretty much, the rest of the SEO community's commentaries have lately been rather pointless. And repetitive. And boring. People are fumbling over the basics once again. Big name people who should know better by now.
How do you tell someone is a bad SEO? Let me count the ways:
They hint that Matt Cutts is a liar. What is up with all the Matt-bashing?
Is Matt always right? I have no idea. I don't work for Google, so I have no way to confirm or contest what he says. But he speaks with more authority on how Google does things than anyone who does NOT work for Google. So, whom should I believe has a clue: A Googler who has never been caught in a lie, or someone who keeps suggesting that the Googler is lying? Gee, that's a real tough choice, folks....
They talk about "quality links". What is a "quality link"? Even Adam Lasnik (a former SEO who now works with Matt Cutts at Google) has been caught saying, "More quality links". Hm. Frankly, when I want more links, I make them. I've been saying that for years. Only a handful of people have figured out what I mean, but they seem to be doing okay. Maybe there's something in my secret sauce after all.
But I don't spam blogs, I don't spam forums, and I don't run linkbots. Nor do I send out emails to people asking them to link to me. And if I did send out emails asking for links, I wouldn't write anything like:
"DO NOT ASK US TO LINK TO YOUR SITES!" why? If you are in this business you have to tolerate such requests. You too must be knowing that incoming links are best way to boost sites ranking and traffic and you too would prefer to get backlinks to your site then why reluctance with other's.
This seems to me little arrogant statement.
You see, my definition of "arrogance" is more like: the act of coming unexpectedly out of nowhere without invitation or provocation to call someone else arrogant because you don't agree with what they say.
That's arrogance.
Yes, I'm in this business and, no, I don't have to tolerate link requests. I have zero-tolerance for link requests. I don't want them. I don't need them. You don't need them. That's right. Whoever wrote "incoming links are best way to boost sites ranking and traffic" only sees half the picture. Incoming links are useful. They are necessary. But you don't need an endless supply of incoming links.
If you've got dozens or hunderds of links and you're still not where you want to be, you need to stop link-building.
You ain't doing it right.
It's that simple. Anyone who says you need hundreds of links to promote a Web site, for most business categories, just absolutely has no idea of what they are talking about. I have moved into multiple highly competitive search expressions with fewer than 50 inbound links. If I can do it anyone can do it.
Well, this is getting long, and I've deleted more paragraphs than I have allowed to stand. I hope all the poor SEOs out there who are needlessly burning electrons took time out (if they are Americans) to celebrate Thanksgiving. We do all have a few things to be thankful for.
One of them is the next sentence. Bless your hearts, each and every one of them.
posted by Michael Martinez at 1:39 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home