AISE Stats: 17/01/2008-24/01/2008

Big Bill <bill (AT) kruse (DOT) co.uk> wrote:

This week's stats are going to be full of people discussing the stats.

Ha ha ha!

--
John Bokma http://johnbokma.com/

"John Bokma" <john (AT) castleamber (DOT) com> wrote

"Jezsta Web Productions" <use-our-email-form (AT) jezsta (DOT) com> wrote:


"John Bokma" <john (AT) castleamber (DOT) com> wrote in message
news:Xns9A369D35A6F31castleamber (AT) 130 (DOT) 133.1.4...
"Jezsta Web Productions" <use-our-email-form (AT) jezsta (DOT) com> wrote:

LOL! And if you think that listing them in some stupid stats

For one, Roy doesn't consider them stupid. Nor do I. I agree with
others that either the stats should include every spammer, and become
(IMO) pointless. Or they should not include known spammers.

Well no there not really stupid, but stats are stats and should
include everything really,

Depends. If the stats only show non-spammers, there is no reason to
include spammers. Most webstats drop hits coming from the same IP
address within a given time frame in their visitor counts. As long as
it's clear what we're looking at, it's fine.

and people need to just ignore the
spammers. The stats are stats and will be pointless is all information
is not listed IMO. This thing about not listing them is being a
childish thing

If no people are interested in the filtered stats, how many are
interested in the stats which have spammers? I mean, if in doubt, let's
vote on this.

Well actually there was a vote now was there. Paul said something last month
and this month. Seeing the stats in true form as I explain can see how bad
the spammers really are.

and for me like this group has become.

You're part of this group, I mean, you can ignore such requests. It's up
to Roy (IMO) to decide what to do with it. Since Roy seems to agree with
removing spammers from the stats, I see no problem with it. Maybe it
should have been done via email, but nowadays with all the spam
filtering and other shit in place, that might be too much trouble.

Well my junk mail doesn't remove all of it. I can't I could loose actual
mail if I did. Your are right it is up to Roy. Paul asked him last month
also, which is why I brought it up that it seemed as Paul was the only one
concerned.:-)

This group is by far been going down hill and still is, good grief if
it wasn't for the spammers there would be nothing posted almost.

You're old enough to know that quality and quantity are different
things. This group doesn't die if nobody posts anything for a year here
except spam. Moreover, I've the feeling that the bickering between
regulars scares more people away than spam (which one can filter mostly
out). That, and sometimes how regulars treat newbies.

Of course I am, that is why this group is going downhill. The quality is
really piss poor. The group will be here yes I agree.

The bickering will be always here. Even the newbies are treated as spammers.
I have seen it. You were on hiatis when this happened. It was like if you
weren't a regular and couldn't do anything pow right in the kisser. I don't
have the time to find them, you will have to take my word on it.

And
further more when has the last decent discussion about search engine
strategies been posted anyway?

I recently posted on my very positive experience with Yahoo. To many
(including me) it was already known that description has some effect.
But I had never expected to move from #13 to #7 in a few weeks. I am
doing now a broader experiment, and will report back on that as soon as
I have noticed a serious effect. Or if not, expect it around my birthday
(15th of February).

Cool, I will be interested. I had done some tests like this also. I even
placed keywords that weren't on my page and noticed a difference.

I will say Yahoo is really different and looks at the whole site for the
SERPs. Maybe I will get into more detail once you post your findings. :-)

Boy if there were stats for that. LOL!

You could keep them ;-)

Phew John, I have too many sites and acquiring too many clients ATM. At one
point I was turning away clients. I turned away at least 10 people in
December for website design. I have taken on 3 this week for designs, and 2
for SEO. Then I still have my own sites and updating them.

Here are what 2 are looking like still in design mode with Adobe for
graphics:
http://jezsta.com/fragrant-forever.htm
http://jezsta.com/thegamesource1.htm
This one is in design from going into HTML mode.
http://jezsta.com/current-design-project.htm
Plus I have redesigned my Jezsta site, made it all divs and used a template
so it would be easy to change next time, and I am redesigning another site
of mine http://homedecorcenter.net/ - http://jezsta.com/home.htm.

As you can see I am just too busy to take stats.:-) Actually, I would much
rather use most of my time for my work as there is money in it.:-)

Stacey
--
Jezsta Web Productions
SEO Tips - Website Design - Marketing
http://jezsta.com/

"Jezsta Web Productions" <use-our-email-form (AT) jezsta (DOT) com> wrote:

"John Bokma" <john (AT) castleamber (DOT) com> wrote in message

[..]

If no people are interested in the filtered stats, how many are
interested in the stats which have spammers? I mean, if in doubt,
let's vote on this.

Well actually there was a vote now was there. Paul said something last
month and this month. Seeing the stats in true form as I explain can
see how bad the spammers really are.

Personally I don't care. Google doesn't seem to care at all, it has
become a pain in the ass to report spam to Google or its products. They
either don't give a flying fuck, or they put fucking morons at the wrong
places.

it. Maybe it should have been done via email, but nowadays with all
the spam filtering and other shit in place, that might be too much
trouble.

Well my junk mail doesn't remove all of it.

I meant that replying to Usenet is a surer way to reach someone than
emailing him/her off list.

last month also, which is why I brought it up that it seemed as Paul
was the only one concerned.:-)

No, I am concerned as well, and probably some others. Just trying to
avoid replying to each and every Usenet post :-)

Of course I am, that is why this group is going downhill. The quality
is really piss poor. The group will be here yes I agree.

Well, spam doesn't help with that, nor does bickering over the stats. I
just guess there is not much news on the SEO front, no major changes, no
huge drops, etc.

The bickering will be always here.

Heh, no doubt about that. I am afraid a lot of people would leave Usenet
otherwise.

Even the newbies are treated as
spammers. I have seen it. You were on hiatis when this happened. It
was like if you weren't a regular and couldn't do anything pow right
in the kisser. I don't have the time to find them, you will have to
take my word on it.

Yup, no problem believing you on that, I've seen newbies being treated
as dirt before, and indeed as spammers. But with all the spam going on,
people do get more trigger happy.

[ Yahoo -> adding description ]

Cool, I will be interested. I had done some tests like this also. I
even placed keywords that weren't on my page and noticed a difference.

I will say Yahoo is really different and looks at the whole site for
the SERPs. Maybe I will get into more detail once you post your
findings. :-)

OK, I am very curious ;-) Since my traffic dropped a bit (I was close to
getting a steady 17+k visitors/day, then dropped to 13+k, now back to 14
+k) I am looking for ways to improve things here and there. It's the
first time I am a bit worried about my site (or: was) :-D.

Boy if there were stats for that. LOL!

You could keep them ;-)

Phew John, I have too many sites and acquiring too many clients ATM.

Yeah, hence the big wink.

At one point I was turning away clients. I turned away at least 10
people in December for website design. I have taken on 3 this week
for designs, and 2 for SEO. Then I still have my own sites and
updating them.

That sounds good. I've discovered that instead of turning people away,
raising the rates is better. You make more money, and you get less
people who want too much (and then some more) for too little money.

Here are what 2 are looking like still in design mode with Adobe for
graphics:
http://jezsta.com/fragrant-forever.htm
http://jezsta.com/thegamesource1.htm

I like the first one, nice.

As you can see I am just too busy to take stats.:-) Actually, I would
much rather use most of my time for my work as there is money in
it.:-)

Yeah, same here. Or at least: trying to keep my blog going. But on the
other hand, too much work doesn't work for me.

--
John Bokma http://johnbokma.com/

On Fri, 1 Feb 2008 02:07:40 +0100, "Jezsta Web Productions"
<use-our-email-form (AT) jezsta (DOT) com> wrote:

"John Bokma" <john (AT) castleamber (DOT) com> wrote in message
news:Xns9A36B9AF8394Dcastleamber (AT) 130 (DOT) 133.1.4...
"Jezsta Web Productions" <use-our-email-form (AT) jezsta (DOT) com> wrote:


"John Bokma" <john (AT) castleamber (DOT) com> wrote in message
news:Xns9A369D35A6F31castleamber (AT) 130 (DOT) 133.1.4...
"Jezsta Web Productions" <use-our-email-form (AT) jezsta (DOT) com> wrote:

LOL! And if you think that listing them in some stupid stats

For one, Roy doesn't consider them stupid. Nor do I. I agree with
others that either the stats should include every spammer, and become
(IMO) pointless. Or they should not include known spammers.

Well no there not really stupid, but stats are stats and should
include everything really,

Depends. If the stats only show non-spammers, there is no reason to
include spammers. Most webstats drop hits coming from the same IP
address within a given time frame in their visitor counts. As long as
it's clear what we're looking at, it's fine.

and people need to just ignore the
spammers. The stats are stats and will be pointless is all information
is not listed IMO. This thing about not listing them is being a
childish thing

If no people are interested in the filtered stats, how many are
interested in the stats which have spammers? I mean, if in doubt, let's
vote on this.

Well actually there was a vote now was there. Paul said something last month
and this month. Seeing the stats in true form as I explain can see how bad
the spammers really are.

and for me like this group has become.

You're part of this group, I mean, you can ignore such requests. It's up
to Roy (IMO) to decide what to do with it. Since Roy seems to agree with
removing spammers from the stats, I see no problem with it. Maybe it
should have been done via email, but nowadays with all the spam
filtering and other shit in place, that might be too much trouble.

Well my junk mail doesn't remove all of it. I can't I could loose actual
mail if I did. Your are right it is up to Roy. Paul asked him last month
also, which is why I brought it up that it seemed as Paul was the only one
concerned.:-)

This group is by far been going down hill and still is, good grief if
it wasn't for the spammers there would be nothing posted almost.

You're old enough to know that quality and quantity are different
things. This group doesn't die if nobody posts anything for a year here
except spam. Moreover, I've the feeling that the bickering between
regulars scares more people away than spam (which one can filter mostly
out). That, and sometimes how regulars treat newbies.

Of course I am, that is why this group is going downhill. The quality is
really piss poor. The group will be here yes I agree.

The bickering will be always here. Even the newbies are treated as spammers.
I have seen it. You were on hiatis when this happened. It was like if you
weren't a regular and couldn't do anything pow right in the kisser. I don't
have the time to find them, you will have to take my word on it.

No he doesn't, as I'll agree with you.

And
further more when has the last decent discussion about search engine
strategies been posted anyway?

I recently posted on my very positive experience with Yahoo. To many
(including me) it was already known that description has some effect.
But I had never expected to move from #13 to #7 in a few weeks. I am
doing now a broader experiment, and will report back on that as soon as
I have noticed a serious effect. Or if not, expect it around my birthday
(15th of February).
Cool, I will be interested. I had done some tests like this also. I even
placed keywords that weren't on my page and noticed a difference.

I will say Yahoo is really different and looks at the whole site for the
SERPs. Maybe I will get into more detail once you post your findings. :-)

I noticed the other day that I'm not actually in the Yahoo directory.
I used to be for something or other as a freebie but I'm not in there
at all now. So I guess I have to finally pay up! :-(

BB
--

http://www.kruse.co.uk/
http://www.fat-odin.com/
http://www.here-be-posters.co.uk/

On 1 Feb 2008 02:44:30 GMT, John Bokma <john (AT) castleamber (DOT) com> wrote:

"Jezsta Web Productions" <use-our-email-form (AT) jezsta (DOT) com> wrote:

"John Bokma" <john (AT) castleamber (DOT) com> wrote in message

[..]

If no people are interested in the filtered stats, how many are
interested in the stats which have spammers? I mean, if in doubt,
let's vote on this.

Well actually there was a vote now was there. Paul said something last
month and this month. Seeing the stats in true form as I explain can
see how bad the spammers really are.

Personally I don't care. Google doesn't seem to care at all, it has
become a pain in the ass to report spam to Google or its products. They
either don't give a flying fuck, or they put fucking morons at the wrong
places.

it. Maybe it should have been done via email, but nowadays with all
the spam filtering and other shit in place, that might be too much
trouble.

Well my junk mail doesn't remove all of it.

I meant that replying to Usenet is a surer way to reach someone than
emailing him/her off list.

last month also, which is why I brought it up that it seemed as Paul
was the only one concerned.:-)

No, I am concerned as well, and probably some others. Just trying to
avoid replying to each and every Usenet post :-)

Of course I am, that is why this group is going downhill. The quality
is really piss poor. The group will be here yes I agree.

Well, spam doesn't help with that, nor does bickering over the stats. I
just guess there is not much news on the SEO front, no major changes, no
huge drops, etc.

The bickering will be always here.

Heh, no doubt about that. I am afraid a lot of people would leave Usenet
otherwise.

Even the newbies are treated as
spammers. I have seen it. You were on hiatis when this happened. It
was like if you weren't a regular and couldn't do anything pow right
in the kisser. I don't have the time to find them, you will have to
take my word on it.

Yup, no problem believing you on that, I've seen newbies being treated
as dirt before, and indeed as spammers. But with all the spam going on,
people do get more trigger happy.

I think myself that people who would perhaps otherwise have developed
into useful members of the group have left after a couple of brief
outings because whatever they say Paul jumps down their throat. As
I've said before, Paul's in pain a lot, I think he takes it out on the
noobs in here. It's regrettable.

[ Yahoo -> adding description ]
Cool, I will be interested. I had done some tests like this also. I
even placed keywords that weren't on my page and noticed a difference.

I'm trying to increase snippet influence in Google, that's the only
experiment I'm involved in just now. I'm using http://seodigger.com/
to find relevant terms I'm top ten for and then trying to influence
what gets in the snippets for those terms. I just started
experimenting with http://www.linkdiagnosis.com/ which looks like
it'll be great for determining which of a competitor's IBL givers will
give the most link-juice if I can get a link off it. I can't open that
site now I note in IE since I added SEO Quake to IE so I dunno if I'll
be keeping that particular add-in.

I will say Yahoo is really different and looks at the whole site for
the SERPs. Maybe I will get into more detail once you post your
findings. :-)

OK, I am very curious ;-) Since my traffic dropped a bit (I was close to
getting a steady 17+k visitors/day, then dropped to 13+k, now back to 14
+k) I am looking for ways to improve things here and there. It's the
first time I am a bit worried about my site (or: was) :-D.

I think Yahoo's so unstable I just don't worry about it.

Boy if there were stats for that. LOL!

You could keep them ;-)

Phew John, I have too many sites and acquiring too many clients ATM.

Yeah, hence the big wink.

At one point I was turning away clients. I turned away at least 10
people in December for website design. I have taken on 3 this week
for designs, and 2 for SEO. Then I still have my own sites and
updating them.

That sounds good. I've discovered that instead of turning people away,
raising the rates is better.

I'm seriously thinking of hugely raising the cost of my SEO reports. A
lot of companies are going to be wanting to cut back on repeat
expenditures involved in link-renting and PPC and I want a chunk of
that market.

You make more money, and you get less
people who want too much (and then some more) for too little money.

I just don't do grief, haven't for a while. A tenner ain't a tenner if
it's got a load of grief attached to it. It's like minus several
tenners instead.

BB
--

http://www.kruse.co.uk/
http://www.fat-odin.com/
http://www.here-be-posters.co.uk/

On Fri, 01 Feb 2008 06:55:24 GMT, Big Bill <bill (AT) kruse (DOT) co.uk> wrote:

I think myself that people who would perhaps otherwise have developed
into useful members of the group have left after a couple of brief
outings because whatever they say Paul jumps down their throat. As
I've said before, Paul's in pain a lot, I think he takes it out on the
noobs in here. It's regrettable.

Er Bill,
Please show me where I have jumped down a non-spammers throat ?

I help those that come in here and ask a valid question - That is, IF
I can answer it.

BUT, if a spammer comes here [esp the SEO India Caste memebers] then
yes, I will attack once I have seen they are just like the others ...
content stealers and making false claims about themselves.

I hate to see people being ripped off. Simple as that.

Yes, I am in a lot of pain 99% of the time, but that is not why I
attack those who come in here that spam.

I cannot recall any post of mine that has attacked someone who asked a
genuine question.

Sorry about starting a new thread on this, but as I said earlier, I
had finished with the other thread.



----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

"John Bokma" <john (AT) castleamber (DOT) com> wrote

"Jezsta Web Productions" <use-our-email-form (AT) jezsta (DOT) com> wrote:

"John Bokma" <john (AT) castleamber (DOT) com> wrote in message

[..]

If no people are interested in the filtered stats, how many are
interested in the stats which have spammers? I mean, if in doubt,
let's vote on this.

Well actually there was a vote now was there. Paul said something last
month and this month. Seeing the stats in true form as I explain can
see how bad the spammers really are.

Personally I don't care. Google doesn't seem to care at all, it has
become a pain in the ass to report spam to Google or its products. They
either don't give a flying fuck, or they put fucking morons at the wrong
places.

Yeah, I don't think they care. I am like everyone else I hate spam.:-) Oh, I
meant that there wasn't a vote only Paul mentioning it several times is all.

it. Maybe it should have been done via email, but nowadays with all
the spam filtering and other shit in place, that might be too much
trouble.

Well my junk mail doesn't remove all of it.

I meant that replying to Usenet is a surer way to reach someone than
emailing him/her off list.

Ok.

last month also, which is why I brought it up that it seemed as Paul
was the only one concerned.:-)

No, I am concerned as well, and probably some others. Just trying to
avoid replying to each and every Usenet post :-)

OK, I like the stats but I just feel stats are stats and should have it all.
Then again I can go both ways. To me when you tell someone the first time
that should have been enough, don't tell them again.:-)

Of course I am, that is why this group is going downhill. The quality
is really piss poor. The group will be here yes I agree.

Well, spam doesn't help with that, nor does bickering over the stats. I
just guess there is not much news on the SEO front, no major changes, no
huge drops, etc.

No not much on the SEO front as far as new stuff.

BUT - I am #3 for home decor
http://www.google.ca/search?hl=en&q=home+decor&meta= and #1 for home
accessories http://www.google.ca/search?hl=en&q=...essories&meta= . On
the Google Canada. It is a Canadian hosted site so I figure I can use the
..ca like people from the UK use .co.uk. I am getting up there on the .com. I
figure once I get there I will be doing really well.:-) I will get there
also.:-)

My other sites are doing very well also. I only have one site that has bit
the dust. So I need to fix it, it was never my money maker though.

The bickering will be always here.

Heh, no doubt about that. I am afraid a lot of people would leave Usenet
otherwise.

They proably won't, sometimes the bickering can add to things. Especially,
whent here is nothing going on. Look at it for the past week, it has almost
been dead. You know the Uenet will always be here with the same types of
people. It will never change in that way. This group though about 5 years
ago had a lot of discussions which it doesn't anymore. To me even if the
newbies come there isn't any information for them. I haven't seen anything
in a long time that could help them. There are just so many better SEO
forums and NGs out there.

Even the newbies are treated as
spammers. I have seen it. You were on hiatis when this happened. It
was like if you weren't a regular and couldn't do anything pow right
in the kisser. I don't have the time to find them, you will have to
take my word on it.

Yup, no problem believing you on that, I've seen newbies being treated
as dirt before, and indeed as spammers. But with all the spam going on,
people do get more trigger happy.

Yeah, but just ignoring most of the spam as I know reporting doesn't help
either, wouldn't that be better?

[ Yahoo -> adding description ]
Cool, I will be interested. I had done some tests like this also. I
even placed keywords that weren't on my page and noticed a difference.

I will say Yahoo is really different and looks at the whole site for
the SERPs. Maybe I will get into more detail once you post your
findings. :-)

OK, I am very curious ;-) Since my traffic dropped a bit (I was close to
getting a steady 17+k visitors/day, then dropped to 13+k, now back to 14
+k) I am looking for ways to improve things here and there. It's the
first time I am a bit worried about my site (or: was) :-D.

Well just to let you in on what to expect with the discussion I have a site
rags-to-rugs.net that I really haven't done anything to and it just sits
there. This was an informational site only. I have a few links to it but not
much. It is really a crappy design and not all the way the same as I did
something and left it. Got it hosted at homestead and plan on moving it when
I got the time with another design. But it can work for testing purposes.
This site will not rank on Google as there aren't enough links to support
it.

Now when simplestuff's home page became more non related to rag rugs, my
site is more about home decor now. I dropped from my very stable place on
Google to #6(still #1 for throw rugs on a different page, so not really
important), now you know I had the top position only dropping to #2 every so
often. I still have many links pointing to it for rag rugs, it is just that
the site and page has now become more related to other things. I hold about
the same position in MSN. But Yahoo in the 30's, but my rags-to-rugs site
has come up to top positions. My rags-to-rugs site is only about rag rugs
and nothing else. Got a few links and has top rankings#3. Shoot I don't even
have Rag rugs in my title. In fact if you look at the top ten most of them
are newer sites with no links really.

A few months I have been watching Yahoo and have seen that Yahoo really
isn't considering links too much but more concerned with meta and page, with
pages have little links. If you notice most of those pages and sites do not
have great optimization, and all the sites basically have rag rugs and rugs
nothing else really so the whole site seems to add more relevance if it
pertains to the subject.

Anyway, something to ponder.:-)

Boy if there were stats for that. LOL!

You could keep them ;-)

Phew John, I have too many sites and acquiring too many clients ATM.

Yeah, hence the big wink.

Yeah, I noticed it.

At one point I was turning away clients. I turned away at least 10
people in December for website design. I have taken on 3 this week
for designs, and 2 for SEO. Then I still have my own sites and
updating them.

That sounds good. I've discovered that instead of turning people away,
raising the rates is better. You make more money, and you get less
people who want too much (and then some more) for too little money.

I make pretty good money for what I do I think. They are just templates and
I am not building a whole site. Just templates. I only take on web design
when my sites make below a threshold of income I got budgeted for being able
to pay for 2 houses. The one in KY and the one here we still have to pay
rent. So really it is me doing what I feel like.:-) I am glad to have the
option.

Here are what 2 are looking like still in design mode with Adobe for
graphics:
http://jezsta.com/fragrant-forever.htm
http://jezsta.com/thegamesource1.htm

I like the first one, nice.

Thanks. I have overcome a lot of things and well even like you following
advice for SERPs I followed advice for valdiation.:-) Besides I feel anyone
who does web design professionally should be able to design without any
errors, this was always my view. Back then I was more concerned with adding
products and making them and keeping my site on top. Now I am an SEO first,
web designer 2nd so I make sure the designs are also best suited for SEO,
and I do crafts when I have the time.:-)

So you don't like my new jezsta design?:-) I will gladly take any
suggestions.

As you can see I am just too busy to take stats.:-) Actually, I would
much rather use most of my time for my work as there is money in
it.:-)

Yeah, same here. Or at least: trying to keep my blog going. But on the
other hand, too much work doesn't work for me.

Well, I don't think I can exist without too much work. I am the type of
person that if I wasn't busy I would be depressed. I kind of like a hectic
lifestyle even though I complain. People make their own beds you know.:-)

Stacey
--
Jezsta Web Productions
SEO Tips - Website Design - Marketing
http://jezsta.com/

"Big Bill" <bill (AT) kruse (DOT) co.uk> wrote

On Fri, 1 Feb 2008 02:07:40 +0100, "Jezsta Web Productions"
use-our-email-form (AT) jezsta (DOT) com> wrote:
snip

The bickering will be always here. Even the newbies are treated as
spammers.
I have seen it. You were on hiatis when this happened. It was like if you
weren't a regular and couldn't do anything pow right in the kisser. I
don't
have the time to find them, you will have to take my word on it.

No he doesn't, as I'll agree with you.

Thanks!

<snip>

I noticed the other day that I'm not actually in the Yahoo directory.
I used to be for something or other as a freebie but I'm not in there
at all now. So I guess I have to finally pay up! :-(

Do you think it is worth paying for? I am not really thinking it would be.

Stacey
--
Jezsta Web Productions
SEO Tips - Website Design - Marketing
http://jezsta.com/

"The Gobbling Goblin" <customerservices (AT) houstoncrafts (DOT) com> wrote

On Fri, 01 Feb 2008 06:55:24 GMT, Big Bill <bill (AT) kruse (DOT) co.uk> wrote:

I think myself that people who would perhaps otherwise have developed
into useful members of the group have left after a couple of brief
outings because whatever they say Paul jumps down their throat. As
I've said before, Paul's in pain a lot, I think he takes it out on the
noobs in here. It's regrettable.

Er Bill,
Please show me where I have jumped down a non-spammers throat ?

http://groups.google.com/group/alt.i...a75afac583bdc9
to <submissions... (AT) gmail (DOT) com>
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.i...237b38db65fdf9
to Sam you are always rude to, and Sam doesn't spam this NG. Sam spams we
all know that but not the NG. Sam does has some inkling about SEO he can
make it with porn and that is hard!
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.i...e8dd0fec38ab7c
here you didn't even give advise, just was a smart ass kind of telling him
there are ways to do what he was asking but didn't give him any info.
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.i...639445739a5750

That is just Jan 2008.:-), and this past month has been slow

Stacey
--
Jezsta Web Productions
SEO Tips - Website Design - Marketing
http://jezsta.com/

On Fri, 1 Feb 2008 16:33:43 +0100, "Jezsta Web Productions"
<use-our-email-form (AT) jezsta (DOT) com> wrote:

"Big Bill" <bill (AT) kruse (DOT) co.uk> wrote in message
news:9ef5q3pc5vcfn52o39fqhk2iihi1qarl6f (AT) 4ax (DOT) com...
On Fri, 1 Feb 2008 02:07:40 +0100, "Jezsta Web Productions"
use-our-email-form (AT) jezsta (DOT) com> wrote:
snip

The bickering will be always here. Even the newbies are treated as
spammers.
I have seen it. You were on hiatis when this happened. It was like if you
weren't a regular and couldn't do anything pow right in the kisser. I
don't
have the time to find them, you will have to take my word on it.

No he doesn't, as I'll agree with you.

Thanks!

snip


I noticed the other day that I'm not actually in the Yahoo directory.
I used to be for something or other as a freebie but I'm not in there
at all now. So I guess I have to finally pay up! :-(

Do you think it is worth paying for? I am not really thinking it would be.

Stacey

I'm not properly in DMOZ either. So, there's no trusted eyeball
verification of my site.

BB
--

http://www.kruse.co.uk/
http://www.fat-odin.com/
http://www.here-be-posters.co.uk/