4 ms·
- I do not understand how 'mln' is more SEO than 'M' - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mole_(unit) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mole_(unit) states that it's 'mo
by nixpulvis 5y ago
- I do not understand how 'mln' is more SEO than 'M'
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mole_(unit) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mole_(unit) states that it's 'mol', but what do I know, I'm not a chemist
Without context '70M' should be assumed unitless, and therefor must be interpreted as a power suffix symbol. Better yet, it falls outside the hex range, making life even better for everyone.
Perhaps, if I'm really trying to be difficult, we could try to interpret 'M' as a modifier on 'new users', but that seems silly when there's no space between 70 and M.
</rambling>
- nickff 5y ago>" - I do not understand how 'mln' is more SEO than 'M'" There are limits to how many characters and pixels Google and Bing will display before cutting off a title and appending an ellipsis. I believe that mln was chosen for stylistic reasons, to differentiate from molarity... >"[Wikipedia] states that it's 'mol', but what do I know, I'm not a chemist" 'M' is used for molarity (molar concentration), not moles.[1] [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molar_concentration https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molar_concentration
- nixpulvis 5y agoLet's agree to disagree.