Calendar
Network
Feeds
Woz
I must say I am wondering what criteria were used to determine the generous "status" of these directories. Given the poor taxonomies used by some of the directories, given the lack of ontological relationships in some of the directories, given the large number of empty categories in some of the directories, give then propensity of some of the directories to prominently feature top-paying-niche sites ...
If the main criterion is simply to get a link, then perhaps they are good targets, but purely from a quality directory point of view then I would respectfully disagree with Paul's assertion that they are all "top" and/or "most powerful" directories. Some are upper tier perhaps, but not all, and certainly not the ultimate of directories.
Respectfully,
Woz
Yep, I know that iBill, but thanks. I was just making the point that the original SEOMOZ information is US-centric.
In these times of Internet Globalisation we need to be more mindful of the geographical import of information we are disseminating and note such early on in the published work.
Yep, great info, but remember that it only applies to the US. To my knowledge, most countries do not require registration of copyright nor make any difference between whether a work is registered or not. Here in Australia for example, a work is copyright upon creation, no registration required.
>won't unscrupulous webmasters just go out and buy links and point them to their competitor's sites?
Or report competitor sites as selling links, regardless of whether they are or not?
Or report competitor sites as buying links, regardless of whether they are or not?
Or post anonymously that site XYZ got a great SERP boost by bying links from YYY?
Or ...
When one tries to close a Pandora'sBox, one usually find many more Pandora's Boxes opend up in the process.
Direct link to Lists - http://blog.terabell.com/27/lists/1001-lists-to-read-before-you-die/
>But it doesn't influence rank
Well, if a bad description tag triggers that page being not included in the SERP due to factors such as duplication issues, I would call that quite a marked influence on rank.
The description is still an important tag and needs an all-or-nothing approach, ie., either a well crafted one, or none at all.
>This is a story about an incompetent ISP, not Google
Exactly! A title edit is in order here.
Story: Domain Spying Hype
Just adding a direct link to the article. Interesting.
http://blog.domaintools.com/2007/10/front-running-hype/
Story: Please Don't Ask Me to Sphinn Your Stories (and How to Use Sphinn and Similar Social News Websites)
Sending a Link Exchange request to a site that has a published policy of not accepting link exchanges - Big Mistake, Huge! And one that often make me shake my head in disblief, especially when the request is received from established SEO type people who should know better.
Interesting discussion, and one which points out people's misunderstanding of the way Javascript works.
Danny has it correct in that SEW thread by stating that "Google, which doesn't read JavaScript or process it (much, right?), isn't going to understand or deal with the onclick part. So for Googlebot, isn't that link going to effectively be ~ a clean, straight-forward ~ link?"
Note that no-one from the Search Engines has, to my knowledge, disagreed with that statement.
Using OnClick is an effective and perfectly legitimate way of giving the Engines what they want, straight links, whilst still allowing the webmaster to track clickthroughs. Far more preferable to the No-Follow blither doing the circuits at the moment.
>helicopter SEO's.
Hehe, good one Kim.
« previous1 next »
Story: Top 25 Most Powerful Web Directories List