LinuxQuestions.org

LinuxQuestions.org (/questions/)
-   General (http://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/general-10/)
-   -   what is SEO (http://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/general-10/what-is-seo-595435/)

mangoit 10-29-2007 07:31 AM

what is SEO
 
I want to know What is Seo?

PTrenholme 10-29-2007 08:19 AM

Asking Google yields many results. You're probably interested in this one, but without more context it's hard to reply to your question.

sycamorex 06-01-2013 08:16 AM

There are hundreds of services like the one penguine advertised.

@penguine: judging by your other posts which are quite random, it *looks* like that you've just signed up with LQ to promote your service. If you want to advertise anything please contact Jeremy, the owner of this website.

sundialsvcs 06-01-2013 10:30 AM

... and people, inexplicably, still think that "their" website can be pushed to "the front page of" Google's generally-useless laundry list, despite the fact that there are only about 10 entries there among (well, not actually "millions" but ...) about 800 entries.

In any case, I think that SEO is built upon what is ... or at least, what is now ... a flawed premise: that people, when they want to buy(!) something, "Just Google It™" and then buy from the first name that comes up. Flipping to the business-pages in my local phone directory (I know, I know, you're all sayin', "what's that?") I see the same logic being applied: AAAAAAA Bail Bonding. (Dunno... if you're stuck in jail, it just might work.)

(Or, more creatively, A AAA ABA Addiction Help, which is a "newer SEO technique" for the phone-book, designed specifically to bump the entry to the top of the list, which otherwise is alphabetized to treat groups of A's as a single letter.)

SEO is much like that phone-book: first, you're trying to game the selection-criteria algorithm, then you're trying to game the sort-order. But, in both cases, you are acting on the flawed premise that this is exactly what the buyer will actually choose to do when they want to spend money. The premise is that the money-spender wants to minimize the amount of time spent searching, when in fact they want to find the most appropriate product or service for their money.

In actual practice, they tend to use modern adaptations of very old, tried-and-true techniques: they ask their Facebook friends (not Facebook strangers, whom they presume to be "bots"). Or, to consult topical directory sites like http://www.dmoz.org (from whence Yahoo draws its lists). Or, they go to a brand-name that they already have been conditioned to trust or have used before, e.g. Amazon, which provides considerable amounts of feedback from past buyers. They are not nearly so "impulsive" as the marketers would lead you to believe.

Google's search-bots don't "know" what it is they are looking through. In the end, it's just map/reduce, being applied to terabytes of textual data. SEO "experts" have devoted so much time to gaming those algorithms that they've essentially rendered them worthless to buyers.

Shadow_7 06-01-2013 11:39 AM

SEO == search engine optimizations

It's basically a way to trick search engines into thinking that you're very popular without actually having any real friends. Overly complex pages plus large blocks of IP addresses and other trickery. Which is apparently cheaper than paying google, yahoo, or bing to just list you first. It's basically why your search results are mostly useless until page 7 or higher. In terms of results that actually match your search criteria.

salasi 06-01-2013 03:17 PM

OK, guys (and gals?), did anyone check the date of the first posting in this thread ('07). I suspect that if the Original Poster had a real deep interest in SEO, he'd (she'd?) have got a clue in the intervening years.

OTOH, if there is a suspicion about penquine's motives, re-opening an ancient thread on this subject (and re-opening it without contributing anything beyond what the OP is likely to have obtained by following the advice in the contemporaneous contributions, and probably forgotten about in the time period) tends to pile more evidence on the confirmatory side of the scales.

Or, to put it the other way, there's really no point that I can see in this thread.

sundialsvcs 06-02-2013 11:03 PM

Sure, we did. But such questions are "eternal." :hattip:

sycamorex 06-03-2013 06:48 AM

Now that penguine's spam post (which resurrected this thread) has been deleted, mine makes little sense.

sundialsvcs 06-03-2013 09:53 AM

Also, if the Powers That Be don't want old threads to spring back to life, all they need to do is to change the forum software to automatically-lock threads after some period of inactivity.

Other forums, as the first step to starting any new thread, conduct a keyword-search to encourage the poster to look at similars.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:26 AM.