I'm all for SEO 101 content here on Sphinn, but this doesn't really say anything new or substantial, you know?

Agree with Matt. This article is more like an introduction to Kim's great article on a similar subject from the other day which we have promoted here on Sphinn:

http://sphinn.com/story/156554

Matt and Jill I cannot help it if someone sphinns an article that I published elsewhere, and I do not believe that everything sphunn here are not similar subjects already posted.

But once you mention that looking like a problem, I would like to share with you an article of mine http://sphinn.com/story/155553 which I still did not find something similar at its level elsewhere on the entire web. Correct me if I am wrong.

Would you mind adding some comments there?

Thanks,

John

Mistaken. Mods pls delete.

Sorry.

@Matt & Jill - it is an interesting concept. I recently had a bit of a change on this though. I used to be the 'nothing new here' kinda guy... generally poopoo-ing such posts. Then someone mentioned to me that what might be old news to us, is still 'new' to those starting out in the business. Thus to the NEW person persuing Sphinn, it might actually still be valid content. And really, if we start nuking anything that has been said before, we might as well close the doors right now. Anyway, I have begun to adapt my mindset on 'beginner' stuff. #2C

Is Sphinn only about newsworthy content? Or is it about useful content? How many posts you see on the front page have just re-invented the bycicle? But many of them still need attention. Like I said in my intro to the submission, I found it a nice summary and a good intro for those who (hopefully) after reading it will want to dig deeper.

If we have nothing to add after Kim's (yes, awesome) post, why do we need the Usability category here after all?

@SEO Workers - "Matt and Jill I cannot help it if someone sphinns an article that I published elsewhere" - true, understand completely.

@theGypsy - as I said, SEO 101 content is welcome. In my opinion, however, this article doesn't offer enough meat/substance for me to vote for it. And I don't get the "nuking" comment you made. No one's nuked anything. All I've done (and Jill, too) has voiced an opinion. Surely that's what comments are for, right?

@annie7 - the definition of useful, newsworthy, etc. content will probably differ from person to person. By submitting it to Sphinn, you were essentially sharing an opinion that it is useful/newsworthy/etc. And, in my comment, I was sharing my opinion that this article, which I would assume to be appropriate to its target audience on Wikio.com, doesn't have enough for me to vote it up on Sphinn.

I know from a training perspective having the same content presented from a different mindset (or angle) can sometimes be VERY helpful!

How many times do we hear something and go "WOW! Now I understand"? it wasn't that we'd heard it for the first time only that it finally made sense to us.. Sometimes it can even be who said it lending credibility to content that we may have dismissed before due to lack of credibility of the author.

And then there's people like me.. I'm thankful for being reminded of things oft forgotten! =o)

I am a new user on Sphinn. I am also often looking for basic 101 style info.  MattMcGee is wrong (no offense as a new user here) but there are people getting into SEO etc every day and not knowing diddlely about it. Thanks SEOWorkers for your basic explanation. I think there is some steak with the sizzle here. It makes ME want to look into the whole discussion more!

Thanks

Mikie

I have to agree with Ron; sometimes it takes repetition or a new 'sphinn' for something to sink in. Is it newsworthy? No. Is it useful. Yes, to newer SEOs and webmasters, absolutely.

We all use and think of Sphinn differently.

My opinion of Sphinn and what it's for is a place to find the BEST articles/posts of the day. I don't believe that either Matt or I were saying that the article itself was inherently bad or shouldn't have been written--just that (in our opinion) it wasn't Sphinn-worthy.

Neither of us even desphunn it, just provided our opinion. Which I firmly stand by. If Sphinn becomes a place where "just okay" articles are constantly submitted, it's not very usefull, at least not to me.

i think annie has made her point in her intro of the sphinn.the article by seoworker may not appear sphinn worthy to some of the usability experts.but still,it may be helpful in exlaining a complicated subject to someone who is new to it.

whether this is sphinn worthy depends,on the question that if sphinn wants to serve experts only and become a site like Academicearth.org.

@Matt - sorry on the venacular. By 'nuking' I actually meant de-sphinning and wasn't looking at anyone, just a generalized comment. And yuppers! That's exactly what comments are for ;0)

@Jill - I don't even know where to start with the 'just okay' articles comment. Methinks this place would be a ghost town if 'just okay' articles weren't allowed lol. Or at least from my perspective of what 'average' is. It goes back to my comment that old hat stuff might be 'new' stuff to those not as aged in the business. A major portion of the articles here, or on the web in general, are a tad mundane to me, but I have a geeks perspective. I often Sphinn things that I believe are of use to 'someone', if not necesarily me. Ya know?

Good convo all around tho... always good to see!