Google Mail Calendar Documents Reader Web more »
Recently Visited Groups | Help | Sign in
Google Groups Home
alt.internet.search-engines
+ new post
About this group
Subscribe to this group
This is a Usenet group - learn more
Message from discussion 'Ethical' SEO?
The group you are posting to is a Usenet group. Messages posted to this group will make your email address visible to anyone on the Internet.
Your reply message has not been sent.
Your post was successful
 
From:
To:
Cc:
Follow-up To:
Add Cc | Add Follow-up to | Edit Subject
Subject:
Validation:
For verification purposes please type the characters you see in the picture below or the numbers you hear by clicking the accessibility icon. Listen and type the numbers that you hear
 
C.W.  
View profile   Translate to Translated (View Original)
 More options 4 Nov 2004, 23:54
Newsgroups: alt.internet.search-engines
From: from_...@nomail.com (C.W.)
Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2004 23:54:20 GMT
Local: Thurs 4 Nov 2004 23:54
Subject: Re: 'Ethical' SEO?
Reply to author | Forward | Print | View thread | Show original | Report this message | Find messages by this author
On Thu, 04 Nov 2004 23:04:48 GMT, SEO Dave

<seo-dav...@AMsearch-engine-optimization-services.co.uk> wrote:
>On Thu, 4 Nov 2004 18:27:27 +0000 (UTC), <spam...@postmaster.co.uk>
>wrote:

>>BMM put links into themselves on every page they build. On their smaller
>>pages, this is a visible "Search Engine Optimisation by Big Mouth Media"
>>tag, with a clickable link. They also list themselves, with a URL in the
>>pages META DATA. This is free advertising for bigmouth, and greatly improves
>>their ranking for "Search Engine Optimisation" it appears to do nothing for
>>the client at all.

>I think any SEO who does the above cares more about their own sites
>than their clients.

How is someone, doing work on a site and placing a link to themselves
in the footer, any less  ethical [SEO wise] than someone buying links
that will appear on multiple pages/site-wide within someone else's
site?

>Also recently Google appears to be penalising sites for site wide
>links, not all sites, just some. So far it seems only the site
>receiving the site wide links gets a penalty (more precisely no boost
>from the links).

Different angle: Many site designers putting links at the bottom of
pages they designed or work on get no perk if what you shared is above
it true. Ok, but what if that generally isn't the reason the links are
there anyway? So they don't get a boost, SE wise, they may still get
some click-thrus and that is also what they wanted.

[snip]
 Considering how

>negative Google is regarding SEO you really don't want to tell Google
>you have had your site optimised!

Google is only negative, in my opinion, about people abusing SEO
thoughts - which opens the cans of worms about what is deemed ethical
and what is not. :)

Carol


    Reply to author    Forward  
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message, you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
Create a group - Google Groups - Google Home - Terms of Service - Privacy Policy
©2009 Google