With the boom in the number of web sites and web masters, came a new
predator. The insidious crook known as the "SEO expert" who claimed to
be able to help naive web masters to get their web site listed higher
up search results on search engines. However, fear not. The mechanisms
for effective SEO are simple, and freely available, there is no need
to be ripped off by any commercial organisation.

Once upon a time, long long ago in the dark history of the world wide
web, when search engines first appeared, these simple search engines
accepted words or phrases from users and compared them with how often
they appeared ithin the text of web pages, and returned a list of
matching web pages, with those with the most matching words or phrases
first. This practise was quickly abused by SEO companies (we now call
it keyword stuffing) and the search engines quickly became devalued.

Modern search engines, such as Google, use far more complex and secret
algorithms for deciding which web pages are likely to be most relevant
to what the user is searching for. While the precise details of how
they decide is kept secret, general guidelines are published. For
example. The Google search engine analyses the content of web pages.
However, instead of simply scanning for "keywords and phrases"
Google's technology analyses the full content of a page and takes into
account headings, subdivisions and the precise location of each word
in its context. Google also analyses the content of neighboring web
pages.

You can simply apply this knowledge. If you have a web page about
"cats", it makes sense to use a heading on the page which describes
what the page is about. Just like the chapter heading in a book. Use
the HTML heading tags <h1></h1> or <h2></h2> as these are easily
recognised by search engines.

Keep sentences simple, and grammatically correct. This not only helps
your readers to understand the text, but also search engines when they
are trying to make sense of it.

Just as sub-headings help human readers to scan a page, so also do
they help search engines. So make use of them, help your readers and
you will help the search engines.

Images should ideally be sensibly named. Search engines cannot easily
ascertain what an image represents. They can, however, interpret an
image name. Thus, "x565.jpg" is meaningless, while
"cat_eating_mouse.jpg" offers a hopefully accurate interpretation of
the image's content. Again, labeling images also helps readers who may
have image display switched off to save bandwidth, and yet who may
choose to retrieve specific images based upon their description.


More Information about DIY SEO may be found from the search engines
themselves at:

http://www.google.co.uk/corporate/tech.html
http://www.google.com/support/webmas...y?answer=35769
http://www.google.com/support/webmas...91&topic=15260
http://www.google.com/support/webmas...y?answer=70897


Hopefully this will help you not to get ripped off by the so-called
"SEO experts" that we experienced webmasters call "snake-oil
salesmen". Be aware, they will flame this post. Just ask yourself one
question. Who stands to make money from this?

Matt

I realise that this is intended as an altruistic, public information post,
but you are not doing *us* any favours...

My boss thinks I'm a shamen or a half-deity since I revamped our website. I
told him that I'd done a lot of SEO in the process, but didn't seem
convinced when I explained what that meant- he thinks I'm holding out on him
to better my standing in the company.

Likewise, when I tell my non-day-job clients that I optimise for google as
standard, they think they are getting something special for free...

But now you have let the cat out of the bag, I'll be ruined. They are going
to find out once-and-for-all that I've been telling them the truth, and
there is absolutely nothing to it. Don't you understand?? All those other
snake-oil salesmen made me look good!

Sigh...

CJM

"CJM" <cjmnews@removeme-yahoo.co.uk> wrote:

>I realise that this is intended as an altruistic, public information post,
>but you are not doing *us* any favours...
>
>My boss thinks I'm a shamen or a half-deity since I revamped our website. I
>told him that I'd done a lot of SEO in the process, but didn't seem
>convinced when I explained what that meant- he thinks I'm holding out on him
>to better my standing in the company.
>
>Likewise, when I tell my non-day-job clients that I optimise for google as
>standard, they think they are getting something special for free...
>
>But now you have let the cat out of the bag, I'll be ruined. They are going
>to find out once-and-for-all that I've been telling them the truth, and
>there is absolutely nothing to it. Don't you understand?? All those other
>snake-oil salesmen made me look good!
>
>Sigh...
>
>CJM
>

Yes, sorry CJM. I see your point. Any decent web designer, one who
designs web sites for clients, will of course produce a web site which
is search engine friendly as a matter of course.

The issue is with those crooks who sell "SEO" to people who have a web
site, but don't understand the issues.

I'm sure your boss and clients will be impressed by your subsequent
honesty, and results which speak for themselves!

Matt

Matt Probert wrote:

>With the boom in the number of web sites and web masters, came a new
>predator. The insidious crook known as the "SEO expert" who claimed to
>be able to help naive web masters to get their web site listed higher
>up search results on search engines.
....
>Hopefully this will help you not to get ripped off by the so-called
>"SEO experts" that we experienced webmasters call "snake-oil
>salesmen".

You are implying that all SEO experts are crooks. That's not true.
Some are, some aren't, just like the rest of life.

>Be aware, they will flame this post. Just ask yourself one
>question. Who stands to make money from this?

I make no money from selling SEO services -- I make my living
by engineering consumer products -- and I am saying that you
are wrong.


--
Guy Macon
<http://www.GuyMacon.com/>

Guy Macon <http://www.GuyMacon.com/> wrote in message:
cpudnTYaOfjj2ETVRVn_vwA@giganews.com,

> Matt Probert wrote:
>
>> With the boom in the number of web sites and web masters, came a new
>> predator. The insidious crook known as the "SEO expert" who claimed
>> to be able to help naive web masters to get their web site listed
>> higher up search results on search engines.
> ...
>> Hopefully this will help you not to get ripped off by the so-called
>> "SEO experts" that we experienced webmasters call "snake-oil
>> salesmen".
>
> You are implying that all SEO experts are crooks. That's not true.
> Some are, some aren't, just like the rest of life.
>
>> Be aware, they will flame this post. Just ask yourself one
>> question. Who stands to make money from this?
>
> I make no money from selling SEO services -- I make my living
> by engineering consumer products -- and I am saying that you
> are wrong.

Me too.

It's all the "black hat" SEO and the ridiculous guarantees of SE
placement that has given the trade a bad name, but I wouldn't tar the
entire trade with the same "snake oil" brush. There are some
common-sense "white hat" techniques one can use to improve search engine
placement. Everyone can learn these techniques with a little research,
but for those who lack the knowledge and experience there's nothing
wrong with hiring a reputable SEO "expert" as long as you are able to
verify that the firm is reputable.

It would be nice if the trade would figure out a way to police itself,
or if reputable SEO experts had a way to certify that the techniques
they employ are strictly "white hat." Too many clients are taken in by
the wild claims of "black hat" operators who can do far more damage than
good.


--
Red

Red E. Kilowatt wrote:
> Guy Macon <http://www.GuyMacon.com/> wrote in message:
> cpudnTYaOfjj2ETVRVn_vwA@giganews.com,
>
>> Matt Probert wrote:
>>
>>> With the boom in the number of web sites and web masters, came a new
>>> predator. The insidious crook known as the "SEO expert" who claimed
>>> to be able to help naive web masters to get their web site listed
>>> higher up search results on search engines.
>> ...
>>> Hopefully this will help you not to get ripped off by the so-called
>>> "SEO experts" that we experienced webmasters call "snake-oil
>>> salesmen".
>> You are implying that all SEO experts are crooks. That's not true.
>> Some are, some aren't, just like the rest of life.
>>
>>> Be aware, they will flame this post. Just ask yourself one
>>> question. Who stands to make money from this?
>> I make no money from selling SEO services -- I make my living
>> by engineering consumer products -- and I am saying that you
>> are wrong.
>
> Me too.
>
> It's all the "black hat" SEO and the ridiculous guarantees of SE
> placement that has given the trade a bad name, but I wouldn't tar the
> entire trade with the same "snake oil" brush. There are some
> common-sense "white hat" techniques one can use to improve search engine
> placement. Everyone can learn these techniques with a little research,
> but for those who lack the knowledge and experience there's nothing
> wrong with hiring a reputable SEO "expert" as long as you are able to
> verify that the firm is reputable.
>
> It would be nice if the trade would figure out a way to police itself,
> or if reputable SEO experts had a way to certify that the techniques
> they employ are strictly "white hat." Too many clients are taken in by
> the wild claims of "black hat" operators who can do far more damage than
> good.
>
>
Jesus wept, I must be sickening for something - thats twice I've agreed
with you in less than a month! Where can I look up the symptoms?

"Red E. Kilowatt" <SPAMTRAP@aww-faq.org> wrote in message
news:2788ga.gub.19.1@news.alt.net...

>>
>> You are implying that all SEO experts are crooks. That's not true.
>> Some are, some aren't, just like the rest of life.
>>

>
> It's all the "black hat" SEO and the ridiculous guarantees of SE placement
> that has given the trade a bad name, but I wouldn't tar the entire trade
> with the same "snake oil" brush. There are some common-sense "white hat"
> techniques one can use to improve search engine placement. Everyone can
> learn these techniques with a little research, but for those who lack the
> knowledge and experience there's nothing wrong with hiring a reputable SEO
> "expert" as long as you are able to verify that the firm is reputable.
>
> It would be nice if the trade would figure out a way to police itself, or
> if reputable SEO experts had a way to certify that the techniques they
> employ are strictly "white hat." Too many clients are taken in by the wild
> claims of "black hat" operators who can do far more damage than good.
>

So basically you are agreeing with Matt - the best way to maximise your
search rankings is to concentrate on designing a decent site, using good
content, marked up appropriately. Albeit simplistically put, that's all
there is to know about SEO.

Anyone who pretends it is anything more than that *is* a snake oil salesman.
There are no secret tricks or techniques, just good web design.

CJM wrote:

>the best way to maximise your
>search rankings is to concentrate on designing a decent site, using good
>content, marked up appropriately. Albeit simplistically put, that's all
>there is to know about SEO.
>
>Anyone who pretends it is anything more than that *is* a snake oil salesman.
>There are no secret tricks or techniques, just good web design.

You are incorrect. They aren't secrets, but there are techniques
other than mentioned above. having the right keywords in your
meta description. Using descriptive alt text on images. Looking
at your site using the lynx browser. Writing valid markup. Always
using the same URL -- either always add www or never add www. Even
putting your URL in every Usenet post helps, as can be seen here:

http://www.google.com/search?q=%3Cht...F%3E&nu m=100

I would strongly agree that content is the main thing to be concerned
about, but it isn't the *only* thing.



--
Guy Macon
<http://www.GuyMacon.com/>

CJM <cjmnews04@nospam.yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message:
6jtfaaF51ldoU1@mid.individual.net,

> "Red E. Kilowatt" <SPAMTRAP@aww-faq.org> wrote in message
> news:2788ga.gub.19.1@news.alt.net...
>
>>>
>>> You are implying that all SEO experts are crooks. That's not true.
>>> Some are, some aren't, just like the rest of life.
>>>
>
>>
>> It's all the "black hat" SEO and the ridiculous guarantees of SE
>> placement that has given the trade a bad name, but I wouldn't tar
>> the entire trade with the same "snake oil" brush. There are some
>> common-sense "white hat" techniques one can use to improve search
>> engine placement. Everyone can learn these techniques with a little
>> research, but for those who lack the knowledge and experience
>> there's nothing wrong with hiring a reputable SEO "expert" as long
>> as you are able to verify that the firm is reputable. It would be
>> nice if the trade would figure out a way to police
>> itself, or if reputable SEO experts had a way to certify that the
>> techniques they employ are strictly "white hat." Too many clients
>> are taken in by the wild claims of "black hat" operators who can do
>> far more damage than good.
>
> So basically you are agreeing with Matt - the best way to maximise
> your search rankings is to concentrate on designing a decent site,
> using good content, marked up appropriately. Albeit simplistically
> put, that's all there is to know about SEO.
>
> Anyone who pretends it is anything more than that *is* a snake oil
> salesman. There are no secret tricks or techniques, just good web
> design.

There is some truth to the notion that if you focus on providing useful
content and good design practices, that SEO will take care of itself,
but that's not quite the whole story. As Mr. Macon said, there are
things to know that are not directly related to good site design. And as
I pointed out, some webmasters may prefer to hire someone else to advise
them on SEO -- i.e. just because I can do my own gardening and probably
should because I need the exercise, doesn't mean that I wouldn't hire
someone else to advise on design and/or provide some labor.

--
Red

Matt Probert warbled:
> Be aware, they will flame this post. Just ask yourself one
> question. Who stands to make money from this?


Ah!
So because the twat maligns professionals, they are automatically wrong if
they defend themselves?
The troll doesn't have the brains it was born with.
Or maybe it does - but got dropped on its head once too often.

There's good SEOs and bad SEO.
Just as there's bad trolls, and bad trolls.
--

Andrew
seo2seo.com
sick-site-syndrome.com

UK Residents:
STOP THE "10p Tax Ripoff"
Sign the petition to stop the government stealing from the
very poorest tell your friends about this petition:
http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/10penceband/