![]() | |
![]() |
| | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
| |||
| |||
|
|
I heard somebody say most of the 'SEO theories' are a 'big hoax'. Comments? |
#2
| |||
| |||
|
|
Stacey wrote: [John Dunlop wrote:] I heard somebody say most of the 'SEO theories' are a 'big hoax'. Only the ones regarding counters. LOL!!! So, Stacey, are you claiming that other 'SEO theories' aren't a big hoax? |

#3
| |||
| |||
|
|
Craig Pickles wrote: SEO is a lot of hard work, Hoaxing can be hard work and doesn't always pay off. What is 'SEO'? |
#4
| |||
| |||
|
|
Craig Pickles wrote: SEO is a lot of hard work, Hoaxing can be hard work and doesn't always pay off. What is 'SEO'? obviously its possible to get high up in the rankings by following some of the standard practices. [...] but in the end your hard work will pay off if you follow the common sense 'SEO Theories' What are these 'standard practices' and 'common sense "SEO Theories"' of which you speak? |
#5
| |||
| |||
|
|
All your base are belong to us! BB (finally getting it) |

#6
| |||
| |||
|
|
Craig, It appears we have a troll. Stacey snip |

#7
| |||
| |||
|
|
Stacey wrote: [John Dunlop wrote:] Hoaxing can be hard work and doesn't always pay off. What is 'SEO'? Craig, It appears we have a troll. What gives Stacey that impression? |
|
Who's 'we'? |
|
What *is* 'SEO'? |
#8
| |||
| |||
|
|
Who's 'we'? What *is* 'SEO'? |
#9
| |||
| |||
|
|
On Tue, 05 Jul 2005 19:55:11 GMT, John Dunlop usenet+2004 (AT) john (DOT) dunlop.name> wrote: Who's 'we'? What *is* 'SEO'? http://www.fuckinggoogleit.com/ |
#10
| |||
| |||
|
|
"Paul Burke" <webmaster (AT) houstoncrafts (DOT) com> wrote in message news:e6rlc15qobvfgpa1q43i940hdc613oj0bj (AT) 4ax (DOT) com... On Tue, 05 Jul 2005 19:55:11 GMT, John Dunlop usenet+2004 (AT) john (DOT) dunlop.name> wrote: Who's 'we'? What *is* 'SEO'? http://www.fuckinggoogleit.com/ I love it when I get a good laugh! Thanks Paul! Stacey Hi Stacey. |

![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
| |