SEO Authorities and their opinions

NOTE: Besides making a list of some notable quotes written by authorities, I'd also want to make a list of quotes where authorities were CLEARLY WRONG, just as a reminder that anyone in the SEO field can be wrong, and to be careful about trusting any one source.

Black Hat SEO Techniques

I'm going to do a bit of homework on the dark side of SEO to satisfy my curiosity and to know all the methods available to an SEO and to clarify what pitfalls to avoid. More I read, I'm surprised to find some nuggets of info a white hat can use. Here's an interesting comment on SEO by Irishwonder.

Bottom Fishing

"Bottom fishing is going to the bottom of the barrel looking for the keywords that are only going to score 10,20, maybe 500 hits a month." Basically, have each page target one keyword and generate 1000,000 pages.

Guest Books & Blog Comments

Black hats use these to build inbound links to their fresh sites, and plop a spam site on a subdomain on free hosting.

Multiple Domains a Day

Black hats put in 2 hours to set up a site and release 3-4 domains a day or more to flood the SE.

RSS/blog submission software

Free hosting for black hat use

What Tea Bag Earl does to whip up a website


Back to White Hat SEO

DICEE - An article about blogging useful for linkbaiting, etc. But I found it useful for rethinking my strategy with my own sites. DICEE stands for "deep","indulgent","complete","elegant","emotive." Not really directly SEO related, but still, it's something to keep in mind when developing any website.


Other SEO Links

Interesting SEO Quotes

Bill Slawski
It can be tempting to relate number of links to a page with the number of valuable links to a page, but a page on a site linked to by the three most important pages on a site may be more important than another page linked to by hundreds of other pages.

Todd Malicoat (on outbound links to other authority sites)
While relationships are important the actual ANCHOR TEXT is extremely important as well. Linking to documents with the anchor text of the phrases you are targeting for a specific page is quite helpful (though it may negatively impact visitor retention rate).

Jill Whalen (Alt tags)
Very important for clickable images. Not so much for non-clickable ones.

Scottie Claiborne
Only in images that are links. Images that are not links typically show no change when adding alt text however for link images, it replaces the anchor text and as such, is very important.
Note: This is worth testing.

Scottie Claiborne
If it plays a role in ranking for misspellings, than it plays a role, period. You can't say it works for misspelled words but not for others. Personally, I don't believe it works for misspellings. I believe Google's habit of suggesting a correction for a misspelling or semantic analysis is more likely to be the source of "misspelled" traffic than including the misspellings in the meta keywords tag.

Note: Another thing I'd like to test. Put a misspelled keyword in the meta and see if it does anything at all.

Michael Martinez
H1 and BOLD are still vital indicators of important factors

Bill Slawski
Persistent internal links do have the potential to make a page appear relevant for a particular query, especially if there is a correlation between the anchor text within those and such things as page titles, and words upon the pages.

Dan Thies (On incoming links from domains on the same IP/C block)
assuming we ignore the tremendous value of internal links within a site, and pretend that there's something wrong with having >1 domain

2K (regarding location of link "on the page"
not valid question at the moment... should be "location of link in code"

Ammon Johns
Block level analysis, or indications that a link is in the footer will devalue the link considerably.

Dan Thies
beyond the obvious, overuse of noindex (instead of robots.txt) can be as bad as duplicate content - picture the spider fetching 500 pages and finding a noindex on 400 of them - you think they'll be back for the other 10,000 on the site?

I don't agree with Dan. I'd like to run some tests to see if overuse of noindex is scorned by SEs.

This user profile specific advertisement patent (PDF) seems to suggest Google ignores <P> with length less than minpagelength and pulls a text snippet of length N from document paragraphs: Note that the patent is dated 2002, and the procedure described below has to do with identifying user specific interests, not how Google ranks a document in their SERPS.

Another interesting document VARIABLE LENGTH SNIPPET GENERATION patent: This patent explains how Google returns snippets with their search results. The length depends on "how much of a document a user might need before identifying the document as one of interest."

Another patent describes how Google looks not only for phrases in the document but the presence of related phrases. How are related phrases indentified? Google Adwords Keyword Tool may be a good source of finding "related phrases" when writing a copy about a specific keyword? Nope. A search for "Desirae" for example doesn't display "naughty at home." The lack of related phrases may result in a page ranking lower.

This article talks about Google assigning a unique DocID to each webpage (note Matt Cutts claims Google's done away with DocID's long time ago). The subject was brought up by one of WMW members during the latest supplemental problems. It also sites d (PR dampening factor) as 0.85. Few other observations:

One thing GoogleGuy said during 3/1/2005 supplemental mess is "I'm asking the crawl/index guys to check out" which doesn't tell me much, but it might be a clue.

I won't quote any more blocks of text from this patent to avoid duplicate content problems, but there are more interesting info in this document that makes me wonder:

high level google architecture


Yahoo Site Explorer

Interesting quote of Yahoo representitive in NYC SES Conference about Yahoo Site Explorer:

Audience Question: This is for Google and Yahoo: My site has over 500,000 products. What is the difference in the number of pages crawled and the number of mentions? For Yahoo we only have 500 results. Why is there a difference?

Yahoo: Use the Site Explorer tool. If Site Explorer only shows 500 pages, then there is an issue.
Google: Every search engine crawls in a different way. Mentions vs indexed. There are instances where we know about the url, but we did not crawl it. Your site may not have enough PageRank for us to do a deep crawl.
Yahoo: The site explorer offers an option to provide a RSS feed of your site's urls.

Another interesting snippet:

Google: Gives example of how Alexa toolbar has been spoofed and used to spam Matt's "related sites" info on the Alexa listing for his blog. (tempting :D )

Audience Question: Is there any truth that search engines ignore robots.txt?
MSN: No, we comply. I found it amusing that Google and Yahoo did not reply here. I know from experience that at least Google occassionally index urls despite robots.txt.

Yahoo: If urls are repeated in different (sitemap) RSS feeds they will just be revisited. Do I sense a loophole / possible exploit here?

Google: The only thing we don't support is crawl delay. Many webmasters that used that parameter incorrectly.
MSN: Regarding links: Links that look natural, that provide value are the ones we use.

Google: Matt shows his Google Sitemap data using then new version of sitemaps. For some reason Matt's blog is #2 for a phrase like free porn on Google local.

Yahoo Answers

I'm not sure how this can be used in SEO. From what I see, the included urls are unlinked text. Do Yahoo give more weight in SERPS if a website is mentioned in an answer?

MSN Sitemap RSS

How do I do it?


Copyright SEO 4 fun