Calendar
Network
Feeds
CattMutts
Here we go again....The above comment, "Old news on older topics shouldn't be posted," BEGS the question, "Old to whom?" Are dictionaries also thrown out and disregarded because all the words in there are "old?" Part of the value of information posted on Sphinn, as pointed out by a commenter in yesterday's episode, is that it indeed does serve as a reference library, of sorts, for all seo's.
Everybody is looking for "new SEO skills." What may be "old news" to the ones who already know, might be "new news" to those who have not yet learned it. So the very terms, "old" and "new" are quite relative to the reader, aren't they?
So if those terms are relative, then the statement, "Old news on older topics shouldn't be posted," is really a statement that deems the author's perspective point as the plumb-line or standard by which all things, old and new, should be defined and measured.
Simplified, the author might have phrased it, "News that is old to me on topics that are old to me shouldn't be posted." Further evaluations of such a stand might include such implications as, "Yes, this site is here solely to enrich me. Posts that include material that I, personally, am not aware of are acceptable. Posts, however, that offer information which I, personally, am already familiar with should be rejected and their authors taken out behind the Baath Party headquarters building, here, and shot."
Thus, the above poster has clarified for us who he is, who the rest of us are, and what the purpose of Sphinn really should be.
Furthermore, what in the world is this author doing presenting material that is exactly like the post he made yesterday? I mean it is not NEW, for heaven's sake!
So might I suggest that the next time the author sees fit to write a dictating post that violates his own mandated restrictions and recommendations, that before he posts his story, I wish he would first sit on it. And Sphinn.
About this comment above: "if you dont have anything new to say, dont say it."...I see. So unless its new, it does not have value? Though I do appreciate the exhortation to do some original thinking, which is a valid point, to imply that only new things be spoken here pretty much rules out all of the seo-related info that isn't "new". Which pretty much invalidates all of the things that veteran posters have posted in the past, have taught in the past and have learned in the past.
Of course this is ludicrous. There is much value to old, proven things. There is also value to fresher material. But because something is newer does not inherently make it better. To suggest that people speak new or don't speak is... probably going too far. How about this...if you don't like it, don't read it. And don't spin it. But just because something might be unimportant to one person does not necessarily mean that another did not find it useful.
But I do offer a solution that might be a compromise between the veteran camp and the n@@bies...How about, instead of there being two post-reading tabs, like the 'What's Hot' and the 'What's New' Categories, that a third one be added.
That third category can be more of an exclusive zone where those who, say, have had 5 posts go hot, will have all their new posts land. Kind of a Major League What's New and a Minor League What's New.
Those who do not desire to sift through the n@@bies posts (Minor League What's New), can go directly to the Major League What's New and find advanced articles with nothing but fresh, recently-discovered emerald gems of pristine seo-truth. And where the above author can share all of his deepest seo tricks, tips and tactics (provided they're new, of course.)
fantom: Good input (as usual). Maybe your informal classifications might well be good names for different groupings of posters, and, thus, posts: Class as one grouping. Mass as the other.
Also, your idea of advancing by maintaining percentages, that is having x percentage of your posts get hot to belong to the upper crust, would likely work as a motivator for people to write less frivolous material. Which would accomplish what the original poster of this thread desires.
Nonetheless, there remains great value to the What's New as you described and I understand that the site owners must evaluate carefully before deciding best how (and if) to proceed. It is nice, however, to see that someone can air a valid opinion, such as expressed by the originator, and that constructive discussion can follow. For that reason, I will reluctantly have to give this one a sphinn.
Here are some screen shots http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=dj3ggfz_14f5jznf of the service they launched.
And, uh, if it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, and was bought by a duck.....
Refreshing post. And there are a lot more like those guys you mentioned out there. People with life experience, connections, a little money, and a big idea. I'm dealing with two of them now myself.
But you do know that the name, 'Think' can be traced back to the greek verb, gnossis, to know, and that there was a 3rd century heretical group called the Gnostics in southeastern Europe and far western Asia. In the 1980's, after centuries of underground activity, it tried resurfacing in Eastern Europe as the Eugo (European Gnostics) which quickly got mis-translated by intelligence operatives from the Vatican and western national agencies on a cooperative mission, as 'Yugo'. To express themselves and to infiltrate communities and strategic neighborhoods around the globe, they also designed a vehicle out of scrap metal from soda cans and old lawn mower engines. Of course, the engineering inspiration for the Eugo vehicle was all designed from concepts and secrets originating from the original Gnostics and passed down through the generations in private, hidden ceremony. These concepts all involved one specific aspect, but applied in various ingenious ways. The result was the vehicle. The aspect? It was cylindrical motion...also called sphinn!
(So there is your connection between DS and Goolge's big wig, owner of one of the original Thinks.)
Very good resource. I did some research a few years ago where this would have come in very handy. Thanks for sharing.
Personally, if they give credit, citing author and blog, I would not have a problem with it. Might even be kind of flattering. If it is shared in full disclosure and in a positive light, you win because what you said mattered. IMHO.
Google phone book spotted...it's just a small thing, though...like just another little water drip in the dyke.
Nice find, though...good heads up!
Story: SEO Ninjas | the Search Engine Optimization experts » How to increase the size of your ePenis
Very funny. (By the way, is there a relationship between those swords you ninja's wield and the reduced size of your competition's, er, 'eReputation'?)
Because Google's agenda is a global agenda. If it represents American morality or legality in the UK, that is only for a season. Eventually, Google will exercise its own global morality based not on what is right and/or wrong according to any culture or country's standards or laws, rather it will moderate according to it's business model. What we are seeing now is just a sliver of the tip of an iceberg big enough to sink all the Titanics. It is the rumblings of a juvenile monster, out of the playpen and becoming aware of its power.
WOW! I watched the video. I can't believe you just gave that information away. GREAT concept.(Need a west coast rep?)
You are kinder to Google than I would have been. Yes their character has changed...from an altruistic startup to the current megalomania syndrome. And in the last year or so, they have gone from a company (that I respected) to a land-grabbing monster that is on a frenzy and sees no restrictions or limitations. Or obstacles. Don't get me going.....
As for Aaron Wall's rant, it's legit. Don't throw out the SEO Book. As a fellow ranter, I fully support and appreciate a good rant. Let's cut Aaron the slack and not Google.
Story: Get your own Blog Theme
And its popularity will likely create demand for seo's (http://sphinn.com/story/2308).
We all know that the lawyer only wrote that to try to get on Chuck's good side because the lawyer laughed at one of Chuck Norris' jokes before Chuck did....
Actually, the lawyer was trying to get on Chuck's good side for some other reasons too. You see, the lawyer made three crucial mistakes that pushed Chuck over the edge. First of all, the lawyer knew that ALL properties on the planet are part of Chuck Norris Properties. Yet knowing this, the lawyer still spoke the name, "Chuck Norris" without paying royalties to Chuck. Then the man refused to give Chuck his wife when the lawyer's wife melted into Chuck Norris' arms. Well, the man refused for 9 seconds anyway, until Chuck Norris actually stared a hole through the man's chest...then the man gave her up for a three-year love fest with Chuck Norris. But the kicker, literally, was when the man missed an episode of Walker Texas Ranger because the lawyer was in the hospital getting his leg amputated. The excuse was not a good enough one for Chuck and Chuck round-housed the entire hospital. That was the Loma Prieta hospital. It was in October, 1989. Most of northern California felt it. But when Chuck round-housed the hospital, it not only severed the lawyer's other leg, but sent the lawyer into orbit around the planet. The man was in orbit for over 17 years. He even did some contract work for Google Earth, taking some pictures for them. So when he finally came back down, he is doing everything to try to get on Chuck Norris' good side. The lawyer now goes around on a skateboard. (Incidently, the term, "but the kicker was..." actually orginated from this infamous event.)
Story: Stand Out From The Crowd: Say Something New 2