squishee
Sensationalist and not remotely relevant to SEO. There’s better news out there, people.
"The time has come," the Walrus said,
"To talk of many things:
Of shoes--and ships--and sealing-wax--
Of cabbages--and kings--
And why the sea is boiling hot--
And whether pigs have wings."
And as in uffish thought he stood,
The Jabberwock, with eyes of flame,
Came whiffling through the tulgey wood,
And burbled as it came!
Oops, sfunn this by accident. My bad. BLAH BLAH BLAH I hate the < snip: cleaned up by mod > "forced to justify your desphinn" feature. Stupid character requirements.
And so Sally can wait, she knows it’s too late as we’re walking on by
Her soul slides away, but don’t look back in anger
I heard you say
this is ridiculous this is ridiculous this is ridiculous this is ridiculous
not very well written, and I disagree. We’ve often seen a permanent bump in traffic after successful social media campaigns.
Story: Does Ego Kill the SEO Star?
I commented on Dave’s blog, but I want to reiterate that I wasn’t aware of the fact that the conversation between Marty and Matt that was referenced in the post was a private one, and it wasn’t identified as such until Matt Cutts said so.
I went through the list and was unimpressed. Maybe if the information were presented a bit differently than it just being a list of people Matt follows and what they do, it could have been more valuable. In its current state, however, I feel that the post is pretty weak. (Just my opinion, of course.)
This is kind of sad. Next we’ll see a post titled, "What Does Matt Cutts Eat for Breakfast?"
This is a submission of a submission of a submission. I think the universe just asploded.
Why the hell would "SEOmoz Competitor Busted..." be a better title? Because it mentions SEOmoz? If that’s the case, any article about an SEO company that’s submitted to Sphinn should be titled "SEOmoz Competitor..."
I don’t doubt that you unsubscribed--what I take issue with is you alleging that we’re threatening our members. I don’t question the technique used because we tested a few different email titles to see which ones performed well. Clearly the "Read This or We’ll Dock Your Mozpoints!" one got a lot of clicks, but if it also garnered negative reactions then I guess we just don’t use that one, plain and simple. No big deal, it’s called testing.
The newsletter title was meant to be facetious. This is an extremely sensationalist Sphinn.
Step 1: Find a story to submit to Sphinn.Step 2. Mention "Rand" or "Rand Fishkin" in the title.Step 3. Front page, baby!
Kim, I’d have to argue that the voters had to choose who to vote for based on the nominations that were given. Sure, I bet that there are loads of marketers out there who sacrifice much more than any of the nominees, but the point of SEJ’s awards was to try and give kudos to the people who are visible in our industry via blogging, conferences, etc. I do agree that the category wasn’t ideally explained, so the people who voted had to cast their votes based upon their definition, and they awarded their vote to the person who best fit their definition of "giving."
Matt, I hope your "potatoe" was just you channeling your inner Dan Quale. :DI’m happy to be aboard--reading SEL every day keeps me updated on search news and trends, so it’s a good habit for me to get into.
Story: Read This or We’ll Dock your MozPoints!