4 ms·
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 becaus
by dohertyjf 14y ago
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.
- illuminate 14y agoThe solution to no-content black hattery is not to promote your no-content site with black hat techniques. Nobody here is criticizing site tuning and at the same time defending content farms. Why defend misbehavior as a justification for misbehavior? Note that I am not saying that you yourself perform any of this in your role. Our anger is not at site tuning and placement but the techniques used to do so, which you appear to be unnecessarily defending as essential for any site's survival.
- dohertyjf 14y agoYour comment doesn't make any sense. Of course the solution to something bad isn't promoting it with something bad. That's just ridiculous and I would never argue that. You're automatically assuming that SEO is bad, or is all blackhat, or is just about promoting crap. I would argue vehemently that good SEOs only want to promote good content. I turn down many freelance gigs because the company is shit. I think you're confusing legitimate SEO with crap affiliate marketing. Big difference there, buddy.
- illuminate 14y agoYou replied a person who said to just create content that was useful to others with suggesting that you would do that, only if there weren't hacked sites jumbling up the rankings. It ~seemed~ to suggest that you were less interested in original, interesting content than you were competing with the top sites regardless of how either of you got to that spot.
- dohertyjf 14y agoI said that we'd just do that if... The just implies that we do that plus other things.