Stop Guessing! Let's Give Search Engines What They Want!

I am new to this group, but I have to admit that I have done a lot of
research on SEO. My prediction is that search engines will rely more on
content and less on most HTML elements.

- Search engine administrators make sure ranking algorithms are secret.
- We have difficulty keeping up with different strategies to index pages.
- Some people succeed consistently while others fail miserably.

Here are my solutions:

- We should look at Demand VS. Supply for our content and products.
- We should write Relevant and Useful copy.
- We should focus more on online public relations.

-------------------------
Here are the reasons for my solutions:

First, pretend for a moment that suddenly you are sitting alone at your
desk as one of Google's most prized senior executives. Google
shareholders want you to improve the usefulness of the index. This means
that users need to find what they are looking for in less time;
otherwise, these users may leave for other search engines.

What should you do?

First of all, you should focus on the key factor that makes the Internet
important: content...and lots of it. The search engine should be
intelligent enough to actually read a web page. In other words, Google
should make sure that a user's keywords accurately describe the
remaining text. If the text is gibberish, then Google should skip over
it.

How should you determine if a web page is relevant?

Google should compare the web page to all other competing web pages. The
page with the least gibberish and the most detail relating to the user's
keywords should come out on top.

How should you determine if a web page is useful?

If there is an excess supply of content, users themselves should be
responsible for deciding the usefulness of a web page. Many
recommendations through the use of links and related text should prove
that the page is useful.
-------------------------


What does this all mean to you and other SEOs out there?

1. If people need something, they will look for it.
2. If you can prove that you have what people want, people will buy it.
3. If people don't realize they need your product, it is up to you to
find people who will recommend only your product.
4. If SEOs want to survive, they need to manage linking campaigns for
clients.

I hope this helps! I would appreciate any comments, criticism, or
suggestions.

Benjamin
www.???.com (classified until its release)

Benjamin Dorge wrote:

I am new to this group, but I have to admit that I have done a lot of
research on SEO. My prediction is that search engines will rely more
on content and less on most HTML elements.
snip

You may find that you are preaching to the converted here.

--
PeterMcC
If you feel that any of the above is incorrect,
inappropriate or offensive in any way,
please ignore it and accept my apologies.

In article <cnAMa.46393$xd5.2357017 (AT) stones (DOT) force9.net>,
"PeterMcC" <peter (AT) mccourt (DOT) org.uk> wrote:

Benjamin Dorge wrote:
I am new to this group, but I have to admit that I have done a lot of
research on SEO. My prediction is that search engines will rely more
on content and less on most HTML elements.
snip

You may find that you are preaching to the converted here.

So you agree with my conclusions...Just so you know, I don't do SEO for
a living. My purpose here is to see if my conclusions match those of top
SEO experts. Some recent posts in this NG show that many believe that
the SEO industry is nearing its end as search engines become
increasingly difficult to manipulate.

Benjamin Dorge wrote:

In article <cnAMa.46393$xd5.2357017 (AT) stones (DOT) force9.net>,
"PeterMcC" <peter (AT) mccourt (DOT) org.uk> wrote:

Benjamin Dorge wrote:
I am new to this group, but I have to admit that I have done a lot
of research on SEO. My prediction is that search engines will rely
more on content and less on most HTML elements.
snip

You may find that you are preaching to the converted here.

So you agree with my conclusions...Just so you know, I don't do SEO
for a living. My purpose here is to see if my conclusions match those
of top SEO experts. Some recent posts in this NG show that many
believe that the SEO industry is nearing its end as search engines
become increasingly difficult to manipulate.

You may have taken Big Bill's joke about needing to become a writer - it was
a joke wasn't it Big Bill? - rather too seriously.

If you mean the type of SEO that is designed to fool the search engines so
that they show sites that don't fulfil the needs of the searcher - then we
would all hope that such SEO is near its end as the search engines get
smarter.

On the other hand SEO - the type that involves producing sites whose
relevance to appropriate search queries is apparent to the search engines -
is becoming more and more important. Hence, though I shouldn't presume to
speak for him, Big Bill's joke that he would have to become a writer -
that's because SEO is about producing relevant material to fulfil the needs
of the search engine user in a manner that makes the relevance apparent to
the search engines.

Hey, I've just realised - after typing it out several times above - "Big
Bill" isn't his name, it's his fee.

--
PeterMcC
If you feel that any of the above is incorrect,
inappropriate or offensive in any way,
please ignore it and accept my apologies.

In article <8FEMa.46443$xd5.2361799 (AT) stones (DOT) force9.net>,
"PeterMcC" <peter (AT) mccourt (DOT) org.uk> wrote:

Benjamin Dorge wrote:
In article <cnAMa.46393$xd5.2357017 (AT) stones (DOT) force9.net>,
"PeterMcC" <peter (AT) mccourt (DOT) org.uk> wrote:

Benjamin Dorge wrote:
I am new to this group, but I have to admit that I have done a lot
of research on SEO. My prediction is that search engines will rely
more on content and less on most HTML elements.
snip

You may find that you are preaching to the converted here.

So you agree with my conclusions...Just so you know, I don't do SEO
for a living. My purpose here is to see if my conclusions match those
of top SEO experts. Some recent posts in this NG show that many
believe that the SEO industry is nearing its end as search engines
become increasingly difficult to manipulate.

You may have taken Big Bill's joke about needing to become a writer - it was
a joke wasn't it Big Bill? - rather too seriously.

***Maybe I took it too seriously because I am a technical writer! ...but
don't worry. I'm not offended in any way.***

If you mean the type of SEO that is designed to fool the search engines so
that they show sites that don't fulfil the needs of the searcher - then we
would all hope that such SEO is near its end as the search engines get
smarter.

On the other hand SEO - the type that involves producing sites whose
relevance to appropriate search queries is apparent to the search engines -
is becoming more and more important. Hence, though I shouldn't presume to
speak for him, Big Bill's joke that he would have to become a writer -
that's because SEO is about producing relevant material to fulfil the needs
of the search engine user in a manner that makes the relevance apparent to
the search engines.

***I think technical writers who produce online help can learn a lot
from this NG. Should a SEO team include writers and editors?

Google suggests a listing in DMOZ. Perhaps this is because human
reviewers are more effective at analysing content. When it comes to
writing for search engines, perhaps someone should reverse-engineer
Virtual Customer Service software to automatically create content about
a given subject. It could crawl the web, quote text, and provide links
to valuable resources...and turn most writers into editors! ***

Hey, I've just realised - after typing it out several times above - "Big
Bill" isn't his name, it's his fee.

--
PeterMcC
If you feel that any of the above is incorrect,
inappropriate or offensive in any way,
please ignore it and accept my apologies.

here here. I think the time is short for SEO scams but not for
knowledgable optimizers.

Benjamin Dorge wrote:

In article <cnAMa.46393$xd5.2357017 (AT) stones (DOT) force9.net>,
"PeterMcC" <peter (AT) mccourt (DOT) org.uk> wrote:


Benjamin Dorge wrote:

I am new to this group, but I have to admit that I have done a lot of
research on SEO. My prediction is that search engines will rely more
on content and less on most HTML elements.

snip

You may find that you are preaching to the converted here.


So you agree with my conclusions...Just so you know, I don't do SEO for
a living. My purpose here is to see if my conclusions match those of top
SEO experts. Some recent posts in this NG show that many believe that
the SEO industry is nearing its end as search engines become
increasingly difficult to manipulate.

It's obvious that content is the most relevant factor. There are some
tweaks you can do, but let's face it, if you don't have the words, there
ain't much to index.

--

Motiv8x
Top25Web.com: Ranking Report & Search Engine Forums
http://www.top25web.com

Google suggests a listing in DMOZ. Perhaps this is because human
reviewers are more effective at analysing content. When it comes to
writing for search engines, perhaps someone should reverse-engineer
Virtual Customer Service software to automatically create content about
a given subject. It could crawl the web, quote text, and provide links
to valuable resources...and turn most writers into editors! ***

I've heard of spam software that did something similar to
this...basically what you did was feed it a keyword
list and it searched google, pulled down the first 10 sites, followed
the links, grabbed the page of content, parsed the html, and then pushed
it through a template to create static html pages on your server.

Google loved the resulting content, but highly illegal, (copyright
infringment, trademark violations, etc) the guy I talked to said they
were getting letters from lawyers twice a week, and because of
automatically querying google they simply deranked every domain hosted
on the ip number from which the queries came. What goes around comes around.

On Wed, 02 Jul 2003 19:40:14 GMT, Benjamin Dorge <bendorge (AT) home (DOT) com>
wrote:

In article <8FEMa.46443$xd5.2361799 (AT) stones (DOT) force9.net>,
"PeterMcC" <peter (AT) mccourt (DOT) org.uk> wrote:

Benjamin Dorge wrote:
In article <cnAMa.46393$xd5.2357017 (AT) stones (DOT) force9.net>,
"PeterMcC" <peter (AT) mccourt (DOT) org.uk> wrote:

Benjamin Dorge wrote:
I am new to this group, but I have to admit that I have done a lot
of research on SEO. My prediction is that search engines will rely
more on content and less on most HTML elements.
snip

You may find that you are preaching to the converted here.

So you agree with my conclusions...Just so you know, I don't do SEO
for a living. My purpose here is to see if my conclusions match those
of top SEO experts. Some recent posts in this NG show that many
believe that the SEO industry is nearing its end as search engines
become increasingly difficult to manipulate.

You may have taken Big Bill's joke about needing to become a writer - it was
a joke wasn't it Big Bill? - rather too seriously.

***Maybe I took it too seriously because I am a technical writer! ...but
don't worry. I'm not offended in any way.***


If you mean the type of SEO that is designed to fool the search engines so
that they show sites that don't fulfil the needs of the searcher - then we
would all hope that such SEO is near its end as the search engines get
smarter.

On the other hand SEO - the type that involves producing sites whose
relevance to appropriate search queries is apparent to the search engines -
is becoming more and more important. Hence, though I shouldn't presume to
speak for him, Big Bill's joke that he would have to become a writer -
that's because SEO is about producing relevant material to fulfil the needs
of the search engine user in a manner that makes the relevance apparent to
the search engines.


***I think technical writers who produce online help can learn a lot
from this NG. Should a SEO team include writers and editors?

Authors and proof-readers maybe.

Google suggests a listing in DMOZ. Perhaps this is because human
reviewers are more effective at analysing content.

No perhaps about it. Google is effectively incorporating a system of
checks and balances into its business model without having to pay for
it. If the site claims to be about fridge motors and it's listed in
the fridge motor category of DMOZ then Google can bet its little
booties that a fridge motor geek has inspected the site and authorised
its inclusion. So Google doesn't have to employ geeks of its own.
Geeks as far as the eye can see round the job centres in Google
territory, apparently.

BB

When it comes to
writing for search engines, perhaps someone should reverse-engineer
Virtual Customer Service software to automatically create content about
a given subject. It could crawl the web, quote text, and provide links
to valuable resources...and turn most writers into editors! ***

Hey, I've just realised - after typing it out several times above - "Big
Bill" isn't his name, it's his fee.

--
PeterMcC
If you feel that any of the above is incorrect,
inappropriate or offensive in any way,
please ignore it and accept my apologies.

MFW Britpack www.extreme-positioning.co.uk
There is only one war, and it's not the rich against the poor,
the blacks against the whites, the Federation against the Borg,
or the Democrats versus the Republicans. It's those of us who
aren't complete idiots against those of us who are.

On 2 Jul 2003 13:56:16 -0700, slimatwork (AT) hotmail (DOT) com (Slim) wrote:

here here. I think the time is short for SEO scams but not for
knowledgable optimizers.

Plenty of work for The Spelling Police too.

BB
MFW Britpack www.extreme-positioning.co.uk
There is only one war, and it's not the rich against the poor,
the blacks against the whites, the Federation against the Borg,
or the Democrats versus the Republicans. It's those of us who
aren't complete idiots against those of us who are.