
<?phpxml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" 
xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
>
<channel>
<title>Sphinn / Sebastian / All</title>
<link>http://sphinn.com</link>
<description>Sphinn</description>
<pubDate>Mon, 04 Aug 2008 14:16:25 -0700</pubDate>
<language>en</language>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[WordPress site search sucks ... no longer]]></title>
<link>http://sphinn.com/story/63530</link>
<comments>http://sphinn.com/story/63530</comments>
<pubDate>Mon, 04 Aug 2008 14:16:25 -0700</pubDate>
<dc:creator></dc:creator>
<category>Other Searching</category>
<guid>http://sphinn.com/story/63530</guid>
<description><![CDATA[Here is Joost's guide 'how to provide usable WP-SERPs', titled &quot;Make WordPress' search function suck Less&quot;. This tutorial will make your readers happy - at least if you invest the time to tweak your blog accordingly.<br/><br/>56 Vote(s) ]]></description>
</item>

<item>
<title><![CDATA[You cana4t escape from Google-Jail when you've spread a bazillion of stinky links]]></title>
<link>http://sphinn.com/story/31345</link>
<comments>http://sphinn.com/story/31345</comments>
<pubDate>Wed, 27 Feb 2008 06:27:53 -0800</pubDate>
<dc:creator></dc:creator>
<category>Google SEO</category>
<guid>http://sphinn.com/story/31345</guid>
<description><![CDATA[Google said they ignore reconsideration requests unless the link spammer has removed all traces on the Web. Unfortunately, getting inserted links deleted at all places is impossible.<br/><br/>61 Vote(s) ]]></description>
</item>

<item>
<title><![CDATA[@ALL: Give Google your feedback on NOINDEX, but read this pamphlet beforehand!]]></title>
<link>http://sphinn.com/story/30845</link>
<comments>http://sphinn.com/story/30845</comments>
<pubDate>Mon, 25 Feb 2008 05:41:09 -0800</pubDate>
<dc:creator></dc:creator>
<category>Google SEO</category>
<guid>http://sphinn.com/story/30845</guid>
<description><![CDATA[Matt Cutts asks Webmasters for their feedback on possible changes of the way Google treats the NOINDEX directive. Except &quot;leave it as is&quot; I've not yet seen a reasonable argument. With this pamphlet I provide background info as well as a solution that could please both Webmasters as well as Google and their users. Please read it, then vote at Matt's blog. Thanks!<br/><br/>45 Vote(s) ]]></description>
</item>

<item>
<title><![CDATA[Link condoms with juicy taste, or how to instruct Google to crawl nofollow'ed links]]></title>
<link>http://sphinn.com/story/30572</link>
<comments>http://sphinn.com/story/30572</comments>
<pubDate>Sat, 23 Feb 2008 09:22:48 -0800</pubDate>
<dc:creator></dc:creator>
<category>Google SEO</category>
<guid>http://sphinn.com/story/30572</guid>
<description><![CDATA[When you must nofollow some (paid) links to comply to Google's guidelines, Google will not use their URIs for discovery crawling. Here is how to change this unfriendly behavior. This pamphlet also provides a procedure to fake good karma despite the usage of link condoms, and discusses the way Google passes reputation and anchor text, er nil, when links are condomized or outputted with JavaScript.<br/><br/>64 Vote(s) ]]></description>
</item>

<item>
<title><![CDATA[How to make search engine crawling of dynamic contents less expensive]]></title>
<link>http://sphinn.com/story/29642</link>
<comments>http://sphinn.com/story/29642</comments>
<pubDate>Tue, 19 Feb 2008 14:05:02 -0800</pubDate>
<dc:creator></dc:creator>
<category>SEO</category>
<guid>http://sphinn.com/story/29642</guid>
<description><![CDATA[Search engines burn way too much bandwidth and processing time when they crawl unchanged dynamic pages. Here is how you can reduce your server load and bandwidth costs dramatically with proper handling of conditional GET requests from crawlers.<br/><br/>43 Vote(s) ]]></description>
</item>

<item>
<title><![CDATA[MSNbot/1.0 is defunct - Long live MSNbot/1.1 that saves you bandwidth costs]]></title>
<link>http://sphinn.com/story/28169</link>
<comments>http://sphinn.com/story/28169</comments>
<pubDate>Tue, 12 Feb 2008 13:09:20 -0800</pubDate>
<dc:creator></dc:creator>
<category>Microsoft SEO</category>
<guid>http://sphinn.com/story/28169</guid>
<description><![CDATA[Microsoft Live Search upgrades their crawler today. From now on msnbot/1.1 supports conditional GET requests and HTTP compression. That's a very much appreciated move. I've chatted with Nathan Buggia from Live Search who was kind enough to provide me with some interesting info in addition to the official announcement.<br/><br/>38 Vote(s) ]]></description>
</item>

<item>
<title><![CDATA[Why removing trailing slashes from URLs is an utterly idiocy]]></title>
<link>http://sphinn.com/story/27116</link>
<comments>http://sphinn.com/story/27116</comments>
<pubDate>Wed, 06 Feb 2008 02:31:11 -0800</pubDate>
<dc:creator></dc:creator>
<category>SEO</category>
<guid>http://sphinn.com/story/27116</guid>
<description><![CDATA[Yahoo developer: &quot;Dude, without the slash it looks way cooler!&quot;A red crab: &quot;Nope. Stealing trailing slashes is a brain dead approach that produces crap and damages search engine rankings.&quot;<br/><br/>37 Vote(s) ]]></description>
</item>

<item>
<title><![CDATA[MSN-LiveSearch is responsible for brute force attacks]]></title>
<link>http://sphinn.com/story/26396</link>
<comments>http://sphinn.com/story/26396</comments>
<pubDate>Fri, 01 Feb 2008 10:06:15 -0800</pubDate>
<dc:creator></dc:creator>
<category>SEO</category>
<guid>http://sphinn.com/story/26396</guid>
<description><![CDATA[A while ago I've staged a public SEO test, asking whether the 401 HTTP response code prevents from search engine indexing or not. Guess which search engine doesn't behave ...<br/><br/>43 Vote(s) ]]></description>
</item>

<item>
<title><![CDATA[Do search engines index references to password protected smut?]]></title>
<link>http://sphinn.com/story/23446</link>
<comments>http://sphinn.com/story/23446</comments>
<pubDate>Wed, 16 Jan 2008 09:04:41 -0800</pubDate>
<dc:creator></dc:creator>
<category>Water Cooler</category>
<guid>http://sphinn.com/story/23446</guid>
<description><![CDATA[Please join my SEO experiment and get the finest SEO smut available on this planet.<br/><br/>34 Vote(s) ]]></description>
</item>

<item>
<title><![CDATA[Getting URLs outta Google - the good, the popular, and the definitive way]]></title>
<link>http://sphinn.com/story/23125</link>
<comments>http://sphinn.com/story/23125</comments>
<pubDate>Mon, 14 Jan 2008 15:24:03 -0800</pubDate>
<dc:creator></dc:creator>
<category>Google SEO</category>
<guid>http://sphinn.com/story/23125</guid>
<description><![CDATA[Yet another robots.txt post? Nope, not really. I discuss Matt Cutt's recent &quot;Remove content from Google&quot; video, plus an uncommon approach that requires programming skills but rescues PageRank, and how it should work in a way that most Webmasters do understand and can implement search engine deindexing.Hiding contents from all search engines requires programming skills that many sites can't afford. Even leading search engines like Google don't provide simple and suitable ways to deindex content --respectively to prevent content from indexing-- without collateral damage (lost/wasted PageRank). We desperately need better tools. Give REP tags (noindex ...) in robots.txt a chance. ;)<br/><br/>45 Vote(s) ]]></description>
</item>

<item>
<title><![CDATA[The Top 10 Most Needed Robots.txt Statements or How Google Messes With The REP]]></title>
<link>http://sphinn.com/story/21269</link>
<comments>http://sphinn.com/story/21269</comments>
<pubDate>Thu, 03 Jan 2008 18:24:46 -0800</pubDate>
<dc:creator></dc:creator>
<category>SEO</category>
<guid>http://sphinn.com/story/21269</guid>
<description><![CDATA[&quot;Dear Googlers, I believe that a dog company like Google needs to take real-world Webmasters into the boat when playing with standards like the Robots Exclusions Protocol (REP), for the sake of the SEO cats.&quot; Seriously, that's kinda RFC for robots.txt enhancements and dull as the dirt you're used to read when bothering with Web standards.<br/><br/>54 Vote(s) ]]></description>
</item>

<item>
<title><![CDATA[Rubber Chicken Award 2007 - Top 10 Finalists - Vote now!]]></title>
<link>http://sphinn.com/story/20482</link>
<comments>http://sphinn.com/story/20482</comments>
<pubDate>Fri, 28 Dec 2007 05:42:06 -0800</pubDate>
<dc:creator></dc:creator>
<category>SEM Industry</category>
<guid>http://sphinn.com/story/20482</guid>
<description><![CDATA[Voting is now open for the People's Choice Awards for the Top Humor Article of 2007. The code has been debugged, the secret algo has been run, the titles have been randomly ordered and we now have determined the Top 10 finalists for the 2007 Rubber Chicken Award for Humor in the SEM industry.<br/><br/>42 Vote(s) ]]></description>
</item>

<item>
<title><![CDATA[Google terminates indexing of Atom/RSS feeds]]></title>
<link>http://sphinn.com/story/19239</link>
<comments>http://sphinn.com/story/19239</comments>
<pubDate>Tue, 18 Dec 2007 04:04:04 -0800</pubDate>
<dc:creator></dc:creator>
<category>Google SEO</category>
<guid>http://sphinn.com/story/19239</guid>
<description><![CDATA[Google removes XML feeds from Web search results. So unless Google provides a procedure to prevent feeds from accumulating PageRank whilst allowing access for blog search crawlers that request feeds (I believe something like that is in the works), it's still a good idea to nofollow all feed links, but there's absolutely no reason to block them in robots.txt any more.<br/><br/>48 Vote(s) ]]></description>
</item>

<item>
<title><![CDATA[How to upgrade a Web site from IIS/ASP to Apache/PHP]]></title>
<link>http://sphinn.com/story/18272</link>
<comments>http://sphinn.com/story/18272</comments>
<pubDate>Tue, 11 Dec 2007 16:16:07 -0800</pubDate>
<dc:creator></dc:creator>
<category>SEO</category>
<guid>http://sphinn.com/story/18272</guid>
<description><![CDATA[Here is my idea of a smoothly migration from IIS/ASP to Apache/PHP, including lots of code snippets. Grab any Unix box from your hoster's portfolio and start over. Win!<br/><br/>37 Vote(s) ]]></description>
</item>

<item>
<title><![CDATA[MSN dudes stick to spamming, officially making a fool of themselves]]></title>
<link>http://sphinn.com/story/17275</link>
<comments>http://sphinn.com/story/17275</comments>
<pubDate>Wed, 05 Dec 2007 05:50:48 -0800</pubDate>
<dc:creator></dc:creator>
<category>Microsoft Other</category>
<guid>http://sphinn.com/story/17275</guid>
<description><![CDATA[Live Search will not dump their clueless and ineffective search quality project. They're proud to be the one and only bigger search engine that spams. Even when they apologize to the Webmaster community, they're not able to tell the truth. They say they don't spam sites that don't cloak, but they do. They say that they obey robots.txt, but they don't. They say they caught lots of spammers, but they discovered spam only from a few tiny sites cranked out for a very short life cycle, and now the cloaking scripts are immune.  What a pile of crap.<br/><br/>36 Vote(s) ]]></description>
</item>

<item>
<title><![CDATA[Google going to mess up the Robots Exclusion Protocol?]]></title>
<link>http://sphinn.com/story/16596</link>
<comments>http://sphinn.com/story/16596</comments>
<pubDate>Fri, 30 Nov 2007 14:01:31 -0800</pubDate>
<dc:creator></dc:creator>
<category>Google</category>
<guid>http://sphinn.com/story/16596</guid>
<description><![CDATA[Google is working on new robots.txt syntax, and I am, politely put, not amused. Here is why I fear that Google is going to totally mess up the REP:Google supports a &quot;Noindex:&quot; directive in robots.txt, which is treated as &quot;Disallow:&quot;. Of course that's an experiment, but if this behavior doesn't change we'll get a beast that is -with regard to the confusion it will produce- way more evil than the rel-nofollow fiasco.<br/><br/>43 Vote(s) ]]></description>
</item>

<item>
<title><![CDATA[How to write a smart robots.txt]]></title>
<link>http://sphinn.com/story/15736</link>
<comments>http://sphinn.com/story/15736</comments>
<pubDate>Mon, 26 Nov 2007 10:44:12 -0800</pubDate>
<dc:creator></dc:creator>
<category>SEO</category>
<guid>http://sphinn.com/story/15736</guid>
<description><![CDATA[A smart robots.txt logs crawler requests, maintains the crawler IP list, serves gibberish to nosy users, helps identifying new crawlers, is lean and easy to validate because it comes with crawler directives for the requesting search engine only.Here is my step by step &quot;How to create a smart robots.txt&quot; guide. Adapt. Test. Enjoy.<br/><br/>48 Vote(s) ]]></description>
</item>

<item>
<title><![CDATA[Validate your robots.txt - Googlebot becomes smarter]]></title>
<link>http://sphinn.com/story/14939</link>
<comments>http://sphinn.com/story/14939</comments>
<pubDate>Tue, 20 Nov 2007 14:22:48 -0800</pubDate>
<dc:creator></dc:creator>
<category>Google SEO</category>
<guid>http://sphinn.com/story/14939</guid>
<description><![CDATA[Forgotten -and, until recently, ignored- not standardized statements in your robots.txt might change Googlebot's behavior all of a sudden, without notice. I don't know for sure which experimental crawler directives Google has implemented yet, but for example a line likeNoindex: /in your robots.txt will now deindex your complete Web site.Better check your robots.txt and make sure it doesn't contain crawler directives belonging to robots meta tags respectively X-Robots-Tags.<br/><br/>41 Vote(s) ]]></description>
</item>

<item>
<title><![CDATA[Microsoft funding bankrupt Live Search experiment with porn spam]]></title>
<link>http://sphinn.com/story/14335</link>
<comments>http://sphinn.com/story/14335</comments>
<pubDate>Fri, 16 Nov 2007 08:43:12 -0800</pubDate>
<dc:creator></dc:creator>
<category>Microsoft Other</category>
<guid>http://sphinn.com/story/14335</guid>
<description><![CDATA[Rumors are out that Microsoft will launch a porn affiliate programm soon. The top secret code name for this project is &quot;pornbucks&quot;, but analysts say that it will be launched as &quot;M$ SMUT CASH&quot; next year or so. Live Search promotes it since August 2007 to Webmasters, with not much success because their referrer spam is somewhat unpopular.<br/><br/>38 Vote(s) ]]></description>
</item>

<item>
<title><![CDATA[Q&A: An undocumented robots.txt crawler directive from Google]]></title>
<link>http://sphinn.com/story/14027</link>
<comments>http://sphinn.com/story/14027</comments>
<pubDate>Wed, 14 Nov 2007 12:40:44 -0800</pubDate>
<dc:creator></dc:creator>
<category>Google SEO</category>
<guid>http://sphinn.com/story/14027</guid>
<description><![CDATA[Update: Googlebot does understand the undocumented Noindex: directive in robots.txt, but Google said it's not (yet) set in stone so be careful when you play with it.***If you ever need a hot tip on how to waste an hour or two with quite funny but completely useless SEO research, read my divulgement of a new and somewhat mysterious robots.txt statement invented by Google: Noindex: /<br/><br/>34 Vote(s) ]]></description>
</item>

<item>
<title><![CDATA[Act out your sophisticated affiliate link paranoia]]></title>
<link>http://sphinn.com/story/13710</link>
<comments>http://sphinn.com/story/13710</comments>
<pubDate>Tue, 13 Nov 2007 02:33:40 -0800</pubDate>
<dc:creator></dc:creator>
<category>Affiliate Marketing</category>
<guid>http://sphinn.com/story/13710</guid>
<description><![CDATA[Here is my linking guide for the paranoid affiliate marketer. Just because you believe that you're not paranoid, that does not mean Google will not chase you down. Not knowing respectively not understanding Google's 12 commandments doesn't prevent you from being spanked for sins you've never heard of.Thus don't deliver different (editorial) contents to users and crawlers, but also don't serve ads to crawlers. They just don't buy your eBook or whatever you sell, unless search engines send out Web robots with credit cards able to understand AJAX, respectively authorized to fill out and submit Web forms.Your uncloaked ads look plain ugly with dotted borders in firebrick, hence don't apply rel=&quot;nofollow&quot; to links when the requestor is not a search engine crawler. The engines are happy with machine-readable disclosures, and you can discuss everything else with the FTC yourself.Do not allow search engine crawlers to follow your affiliate links, paid links, nor other disliked votes as per search engine guidelines. Of course condomizing such links is not your responsibility, but getting penalized for not doing Google's job is not exactly funny.<br/><br/>38 Vote(s) ]]></description>
</item>

<item>
<title><![CDATA[Text link broker woes: Google`s smart paid link sniffers]]></title>
<link>http://sphinn.com/story/12735</link>
<comments>http://sphinn.com/story/12735</comments>
<pubDate>Tue, 06 Nov 2007 12:05:30 -0800</pubDate>
<dc:creator></dc:creator>
<category>Google SEO</category>
<guid>http://sphinn.com/story/12735</guid>
<description><![CDATA[Folks are worrying whether an algo can detect the intention of links or not, usually focusing on particular links or linking methods. Google on the other hand looks at the whole crawlable Web. When they develop a paid link detection algo, they have a copy of the known universe to play with, as well as a complete history of each and every hyperlink crawled by Ms. Googlebot since 1998 or so. Naturally, their statistical methods will catch massive artificial linkage first, but fine tuning the sensitivity of paid link sniffers respectively creating variants to cover different linking patterns is no big deal. Of course there is always a way to hide a paid link, but nobody can hide millions of them.<br/><br/>44 Vote(s) ]]></description>
</item>

<item>
<title><![CDATA[The day the routers died [unsphinnable for non-geeks]]]></title>
<link>http://sphinn.com/story/11547</link>
<comments>http://sphinn.com/story/11547</comments>
<pubDate>Mon, 29 Oct 2007 13:59:23 -0700</pubDate>
<dc:creator></dc:creator>
<category>Water Cooler</category>
<guid>http://sphinn.com/story/11547</guid>
<description><![CDATA[Lots of good reasons NOT to sphinn this video. * My server will be down for 15 minutes or so at 4:00 am* It's frigging hilarious, err geeky* You've better things to do* 5 minutes of laughing on a Monday is not part of your job description* You need to lookup the Wiki for an explanation of IPv** Your sysadm disabled traceroutes * You believe in static IP addresses* You hate bad news ...<br/><br/>33 Vote(s) ]]></description>
</item>

<item>
<title><![CDATA[A pragmatic defence against Googlea4s anti paid links campaign]]></title>
<link>http://sphinn.com/story/11205</link>
<comments>http://sphinn.com/story/11205</comments>
<pubDate>Fri, 26 Oct 2007 08:48:53 -0700</pubDate>
<dc:creator></dc:creator>
<category>Google SEO</category>
<guid>http://sphinn.com/story/11205</guid>
<description><![CDATA[You're absolutely right when you say that search engine nitpicking should not force you to throw nofollow crap on your links like confetti. From your and my point of view condomizing links is wrong, but sometimes it's better to pragmatically comply to such policies in order to stay in the game.Complying to Google's laws does not mean that you must deliver crawler directives like rel=&quot;nofollow&quot; to your visitors. Since Google is concerned about search engine rankings influenced by uncondomized links with commercial intent, serving crawler directives to crawlers and clean links to users is perfectly in line with Google's goals.Hence cloak the hell out of your links. I'm discussing a PHP/Apache example providing copy+paste code, but this method is adaptable to other server sided scripting languages like ASP or so with ease.<br/><br/>38 Vote(s) ]]></description>
</item>

<item>
<title><![CDATA[Google Toolbar PageRank deductions make sense]]></title>
<link>http://sphinn.com/story/10881</link>
<comments>http://sphinn.com/story/10881</comments>
<pubDate>Wed, 24 Oct 2007 15:27:56 -0700</pubDate>
<dc:creator></dc:creator>
<category>Google SEO</category>
<guid>http://sphinn.com/story/10881</guid>
<description><![CDATA[Decoding Google's toolbar broadcast:Does Google use toolbar PR as a &quot;change your stuff or find yourself kicked out soon&quot; message? Deducting toolbar PR lowers the prices, will less toolbar PR lower the amount of link purchases? Toolbar PR deductions without significant effects on traffic aren't penalties, so why does Google manipulate this meaningless but closely monitored thingy?<br/><br/>22 Vote(s) ]]></description>
</item>

<item>
<title><![CDATA[Everything you always wanted to know about redirects but never bothered to research]]></title>
<link>http://sphinn.com/story/8883</link>
<comments>http://sphinn.com/story/8883</comments>
<pubDate>Tue, 09 Oct 2007 09:03:37 -0700</pubDate>
<dc:creator></dc:creator>
<category>SEO</category>
<guid>http://sphinn.com/story/8883</guid>
<description><![CDATA[Here is my book on server sided redirects. It's a longish draft intended to bore you to death with geeky language and dull quotes from protocol standards and similar technical documents. For entertainment purposes it comes with search engine bashing, and it's sprinkled with tips and tricks. Enjoy.<br/><br/>108 Vote(s) ]]></description>
</item>

<item>
<title><![CDATA[Shit happens, your redirects hit the fan!]]></title>
<link>http://sphinn.com/story/7170</link>
<comments>http://sphinn.com/story/7170</comments>
<pubDate>Wed, 26 Sep 2007 14:47:24 -0700</pubDate>
<dc:creator></dc:creator>
<category>SEO</category>
<guid>http://sphinn.com/story/7170</guid>
<description><![CDATA[Did you ever revamp a site? If so, possibly you suffer from an often overlooked search engine penalty: redirect chains deindex or at least downrank your stuff. Do a sanity check now!<br/><br/>67 Vote(s) ]]></description>
</item>

<item>
<title><![CDATA[Google's Adam Lasnik offers 5 peeks into the secret sauce]]></title>
<link>http://sphinn.com/story/6951</link>
<comments>http://sphinn.com/story/6951</comments>
<pubDate>Tue, 25 Sep 2007 12:43:21 -0700</pubDate>
<dc:creator></dc:creator>
<category>Google SEO</category>
<guid>http://sphinn.com/story/6951</guid>
<description><![CDATA[That's not a hypothetical post like &amp;quot;what you ever wanted to ask Google&amp;quot;. Google's Adam Lasnik requests:&amp;quot;Got questions?&amp;nbsp; We've got answers:&amp;nbsp; at least five (5) substantiveresponses to your picks on webmaster'y topics over the next two weeks.We invite you to ask questions in this thread that:- don't deal with a specific site or sites- are likely to be of interest to a great many webmasters around theworld- aren't already covered in one of our recent blog posts or in ourHelp CenterAnd in turn we will do one of the following for each response:- Start a thread in this group with a detailed answer.- Add new Help Center documentation or substantially revise anexisting doc to cover your question.- Do a blog post on the topic. &amp;quot;Now chime in folks!<br/><br/>33 Vote(s) ]]></description>
</item>

<item>
<title><![CDATA[Your blog's comment form sucks. Yes, YOURS!]]></title>
<link>http://sphinn.com/story/6761</link>
<comments>http://sphinn.com/story/6761</comments>
<pubDate>Mon, 24 Sep 2007 15:41:53 -0700</pubDate>
<dc:creator></dc:creator>
<category>Blogging</category>
<guid>http://sphinn.com/story/6761</guid>
<description><![CDATA[When do you fire up your editor and FTP client to make your comment form convenient? Even tiny enhancements can make your visitors happier.<br/><br/>42 Vote(s) ]]></description>
</item>

<item>
<title><![CDATA[How to get the perfect logo for your blog]]></title>
<link>http://sphinn.com/story/6122</link>
<comments>http://sphinn.com/story/6122</comments>
<pubDate>Wed, 19 Sep 2007 08:31:14 -0700</pubDate>
<dc:creator></dc:creator>
<category>Blogging</category>
<guid>http://sphinn.com/story/6122</guid>
<description><![CDATA[Do you have a unique logo? Is it compelling and rememberable? If you put it on a page along with 100+ icons gathered from your usual hangouts, will its thumbnail stick out? Does it represent you, your business, your niche, or whatever you blog for? Do you brand yourself at all? Why not? Do it.<br/><br/>31 Vote(s) ]]></description>
</item>

<item>
<title><![CDATA[If youa4re not an Amway millionaire avoid BlogRush like the plague!]]></title>
<link>http://sphinn.com/story/5973</link>
<comments>http://sphinn.com/story/5973</comments>
<pubDate>Tue, 18 Sep 2007 08:22:35 -0700</pubDate>
<dc:creator></dc:creator>
<category>Blogging</category>
<guid>http://sphinn.com/story/5973</guid>
<description><![CDATA[Do not click BlogRush affiliate links before you're fully awake. If you follow the crowd:1. You won't get free targeted traffic to your niche blog.2. You'll make other people rich.3. You'll piss off your readers.4. You'll promote BlogRush and get nothing in return.5. You shouldn't trust a site fucking up the very first HTTP request. ;)6. Pyramid schemes just don't work for you.Am I dead wrong?<br/><br/>55 Vote(s) ]]></description>
</item>

<item>
<title><![CDATA[Sign up for myBlogRush at Sphinn]]></title>
<link>http://sphinn.com/story/5721</link>
<comments>http://sphinn.com/story/5721</comments>
<pubDate>Sun, 16 Sep 2007 06:01:16 -0700</pubDate>
<dc:creator></dc:creator>
<category>Sphinn Zone</category>
<guid>http://sphinn.com/story/5721</guid>
<description><![CDATA[Do we really need to flood Sphinn with posts aimed to trick each other into signing up as traffic booster?<br/><br/>29 Vote(s) ]]></description>
</item>

<item>
<title><![CDATA[Did Matt Cutts by accident reveal a sure-fire procedure to identify supplemental results?]]></title>
<link>http://sphinn.com/story/5469</link>
<comments>http://sphinn.com/story/5469</comments>
<pubDate>Thu, 13 Sep 2007 09:22:51 -0700</pubDate>
<dc:creator></dc:creator>
<category>Google SEO</category>
<guid>http://sphinn.com/story/5469</guid>
<description><![CDATA[I couldn't resist to post this vague piece of speculation before doing solid research. Maybe I'm dead wrong.<br/><br/>40 Vote(s) ]]></description>
</item>

<item>
<title><![CDATA[Google Recommends Screwing Affiliates for Better SERP Positioning]]></title>
<link>http://sphinn.com/story/5362</link>
<comments>http://sphinn.com/story/5362</comments>
<pubDate>Wed, 12 Sep 2007 09:39:17 -0700</pubDate>
<dc:creator></dc:creator>
<category>Google SEO</category>
<guid>http://sphinn.com/story/5362</guid>
<description><![CDATA[I've worked hard to overtake the SERP positions of a couple sites allowing me to link to them with an affiliate ID, and now the allmighty Google tells the sponsors they must screw me with internal 301 redirects to rescue their rankings. Bugger.Since I read the shocking news on Google's official Webmaster blog this morning I worked on a counter strategy, with success. Affiliate programs will not screw me, not even with Google's help. They'll be hoist by their own petard. I'll strike back with nofollow and I'll take no prisoners.<br/><br/>44 Vote(s) ]]></description>
</item>

<item>
<title><![CDATA[How to code categorized sitemaps and topical mini-hubs with WordPress]]></title>
<link>http://sphinn.com/story/5093</link>
<comments>http://sphinn.com/story/5093</comments>
<pubDate>Mon, 10 Sep 2007 01:05:29 -0700</pubDate>
<dc:creator></dc:creator>
<category>Blogging</category>
<guid>http://sphinn.com/story/5093</guid>
<description><![CDATA[That's a free script for WordPress, not a plug-in, coming with step by step instructions and template code snippets. It creates internal hubs which make sure that each and every post is only one hop away from the blog's main page, and that each category has its optimized links list - without content duplication. The script generates not only spider fodder, it enhances the blog's navigation.<br/><br/>25 Vote(s) ]]></description>
</item>

<item>
<title><![CDATA[Google (like Yahoo) treats undelayed meta refreshs as 301 redirects]]></title>
<link>http://sphinn.com/story/4548</link>
<comments>http://sphinn.com/story/4548</comments>
<pubDate>Tue, 04 Sep 2007 04:32:18 -0700</pubDate>
<dc:creator></dc:creator>
<category>SEO</category>
<guid>http://sphinn.com/story/4548</guid>
<description><![CDATA[Not exactly news for most of us, but nice of Adam Lasnik to spread the info before the official help documents are updated.The post discusses the meta refresh addressing technically unexperienced publishers trying to rescue their stuff from free hosts.<br/><br/>27 Vote(s) ]]></description>
</item>

<item>
<title><![CDATA[How to SEO-sanitize a WordPress theme in 5 minutes]]></title>
<link>http://sphinn.com/story/4335</link>
<comments>http://sphinn.com/story/4335</comments>
<pubDate>Fri, 31 Aug 2007 14:03:04 -0700</pubDate>
<dc:creator></dc:creator>
<category>Blogging</category>
<guid>http://sphinn.com/story/4335</guid>
<description><![CDATA[This article comes with one blatant lie, many technical tips, and a number in the title which seems obligatory these days.In fact it's kinda &quot;first aid SEO for WordPress&quot; checklist with copy+paste code.<br/><br/>35 Vote(s) ]]></description>
</item>

<item>
<title><![CDATA[If you free-host your blog flee now!]]></title>
<link>http://sphinn.com/story/4072</link>
<comments>http://sphinn.com/story/4072</comments>
<pubDate>Wed, 29 Aug 2007 06:31:35 -0700</pubDate>
<dc:creator></dc:creator>
<category>Blogging</category>
<guid>http://sphinn.com/story/4072</guid>
<description><![CDATA[This piece is for folks running their blog on a subdomain. When I started my blogging experiment in 2005, I was lazy enough to choose Blogger, although after many years of webmastering, providing Webmaster support and rescuing contents from (respectively writing off contents on) free hosts I should have known that I was going to run into serious troubles. Please learn from my errors.<br/><br/>29 Vote(s) ]]></description>
</item>

<item>
<title><![CDATA[Danny and Michelle to release new Sphinn Buttons!]]></title>
<link>http://sphinn.com/story/4068</link>
<comments>http://sphinn.com/story/4068</comments>
<pubDate>Wed, 29 Aug 2007 06:02:56 -0700</pubDate>
<dc:creator></dc:creator>
<category>Sphinn Zone</category>
<guid>http://sphinn.com/story/4068</guid>
<description><![CDATA[According to sources close to Sphinn's inner circle Sphinn will soon release new buttons which should no longer confuse the legion of sphinners still clicking on the counter instead of the text link. Here is a preview I've stolen in the Sphinn labs.Ok, that's a lie and yes I was bored for a few minutes, but feel free to click through to the swag.<br/><br/>26 Vote(s) ]]></description>
</item>

<item>
<title><![CDATA[A few technical tips on moving a blog from Blogger to WordPress]]></title>
<link>http://sphinn.com/story/3877</link>
<comments>http://sphinn.com/story/3877</comments>
<pubDate>Mon, 27 Aug 2007 08:04:07 -0700</pubDate>
<dc:creator></dc:creator>
<category>Blogging</category>
<guid>http://sphinn.com/story/3877</guid>
<description><![CDATA[A few ... sigh ... actually six but that's not linkbait. You read the seventh tip here first: escape from free hosted blogging hell before you've gained too many inbound links. Regardless where you free-host your stuff, flee now. If you don't own the domain, you don't own your content.<br/><br/>24 Vote(s) ]]></description>
</item>

</channel>
</rss>
