Nobody else read this as a joke? I read it as a joke (and a slightly racist one at that).
Robots.txt
31–40 of 142 posts
Re: Robots.txt
#32Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's more like new cars being introduced without service manuals, forcing the mechanic to continually figure out how to fix them.
I don't think this is a good analogy. Google's job is to make sure good content is ranked high and crap is ranked low. You should just create content that is useful to others and let Google figure out how to discover it and rank it high (they are good at it). To create useful content, you don't need to know Google internals.
And we would just do this if Google actually made good on their promises to do this, but I see an awful lot of crap still ranking in the SERPs especially because of hacked sites and link networks.
Full disclosure - I work in SEO.
Re: Robots.txt
#33Am i the only one who thinks that SEO is more a plague then it is a real profession? Google making it hard for SEO is exactly the right thing to do. Making it impossible for SEO should be the ultimate _goal_ of a good search engine.
The story really didn't dissuade me from thinking about the profession of SEO as the sorts of people looking for easy money at the expense of others.
I'm sure MLM operators and spammers didn't do well in school, were hostile to the people around them and love flashy clothes, big checks, and fast cars as well.
Re: Robots.txt
#34Am i the only one who thinks that SEO is more a plague then it is a real profession? Google making it hard for SEO is exactly the right thing to do. Making it impossible for SEO should be the ultimate _goal_ of a good search engine.
I think this is a common view, and I share it: I really don't like SEO. The thing is, SEO does provide real value, but it provides value because the system is broken: your website should reach the top of search results based on merit, not based on some arcane black magic. I think it's somewhat akin to lobbyists: I don't blame them for making money off and taking advantage off the political system, and they certainly…
In short, don't hate the player hate the game?
I understand where you're coming from, but that's crap. Just because there is always someone willing to do ethically questionable things that fall within the letter of the law, doesn't mean that those types of people shouldn't be treated with disdain by the rest of us.
Re: Robots.txt
#35Keep up the good work Google. I hope this serves as encouragement for them to continue to screw over those who want to turn searching for relevant information into a war for who can cheat the system the best.
Amen brother.
Re: Robots.txt
#36An SEO consultant complaining about Google's frequent algo changes is like a mechanic complaining that cars break down too often.
Or whining about "too many computers in cars nowadays." Thanks but no thanks. I'll take the improved efficiency and reliability over your laziness to retrain.
A legit complaint would be the miniaturization making it difficult to work on your own car without a more complete disassembly, engine removal, etc, I rarely hear "too many computers" from actual mechanics or people who used to do self-repairs in the past. I tend to hear these complaints from less-knowledgeable consumers rationalizing why their cars are breaking down.
Re: Robots.txt
#37Am i the only one who thinks that SEO is more a plague then it is a real profession? Google making it hard for SEO is exactly the right thing to do. Making it impossible for SEO should be the ultimate _goal_ of a good search engine.
Depends what you mean.
If you mean people whose goal it is to help site owners learn how to structure their data intelligently for dissection by machines, people who make companies think very hard about their content, people who encourage high-quality crosslinks and meta tags, and people who generally help sites manage data, then no, SEOs are great. They help users and companies alike.
If you mean the dirtball black hats, then yes, they are a parasite that deserves no mercy and should be eliminated at all costs.
Re: Robots.txt
#38Am i the only one who thinks that SEO is more a plague then it is a real profession? Google making it hard for SEO is exactly the right thing to do. Making it impossible for SEO should be the ultimate _goal_ of a good search engine.
Depends what you mean. If you mean people whose goal it is to help site owners learn how to structure their data intelligently for dissection by machines, people who make companies think very hard about their content, people who encourage high-quality crosslinks and meta tags, and people who generally help sites manage data, then no, SEOs are great. They help users and companies alike. If you mean the dirtball black…
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/If-by-whiskey seems relevant.
Re: Robots.txt
#39Am i the only one who thinks that SEO is more a plague then it is a real profession? Google making it hard for SEO is exactly the right thing to do. Making it impossible for SEO should be the ultimate _goal_ of a good search engine.
Depends what you mean. If you mean people whose goal it is to help site owners learn how to structure their data intelligently for dissection by machines, people who make companies think very hard about their content, people who encourage high-quality crosslinks and meta tags, and people who generally help sites manage data, then no, SEOs are great. They help users and companies alike. If you mean the dirtball black…
If you care about the underlying algorithms, I'd think it's pretty clear which kind of SEO we're talking about.
Re: Robots.txt
#40I think SEO is practically dead, and for good. The Social Web is supposedly lot more democratic and apparently a better choice.
I can give plenty of counter examples, but the one that immediately jumps to mind is orgs like Pissed Consumer, who are essentially using subdomains to hijack other companies' Google juice. However, it's also hard for me to suggest that those links are not relevant to queries if you look for something like "_____ reviews"