Comments on: linkfame

By: The Blogger’s MardiGras | languagedump.com

The Blogger’s MardiGras | languagedump.com — Thu, 08 Nov 2007 10:03:30 +0000

[...] Lampard presents linkfame posted at [...]

By: John

John — Fri, 27 Jul 2007 04:46:39 +0000

@Jeane – it’s all about cross pollination – exactly what I think :)

@Anthony – you sure can’t miss John Chow’s links campaigns! What I was reading on the Authority Blogger forum suggested his use of “non contextual” links also played a part in his predicament though. You’re right links are gold, and people are still arriving here, which is the main thing – search engines notwithstanding!

@Kurt – that sounds like a far more sensible method of indexing – it’ll be interesting to see the results…

@Anne – thanks for the compliment! Looks like I’m not the only one who thinks “less is more” :) You’re right, being “reined in” by your blog would be defeating the purpose of blogging in the first place!

@Carol – there would ways to take advantage of that higher PR though, wouldn’t there?

By: carol

carol — Fri, 27 Jul 2007 02:56:19 +0000

You know I don’t even care about that on my view of it Blog but on the one I am trying to learn how to earn with I work on that kind of stuff. The one I don’t work on has a a much higher page rank than the one I do..sigh

By: Anne

Anne — Fri, 27 Jul 2007 01:40:21 +0000

Standards are merely personal preferences, in spite of what anyone would tell us. If one is an independent blogger, one must please oneself primarily, albeit with a consideration given to one’s readers. When we place too much emphasis and importance on statistics and referrers and such, then the blog controls us rather than the other way around. At that point, blogging ceases to be satisfying and becomes instead a dreaded chore, a race almost impossible to win.

Love your minimalist look, by the way. Wonder why ~;-)

By: Derami

Derami — Thu, 26 Jul 2007 14:54:53 +0000

I just wish the GoogleBots were smarter. The problem as I see it is: Google sees non-contextual links and assumes (and is right in the case of JohnChow.com) that some of those are paid links and not organic. Also: given the sheer number of sites out there Google has to figure out, without being smart enough to understand the content, which websites are authorities on which subjects. To do that, it has (unfortunately) taken to looking for sites that post mostly about a limited subset (hah!) of things. That being said, latent semantic indexing is supposed to be taking over which will greatly improve the situation. In a nutshell, as I understand it, this will mean that Google looks at a page or post and sees whether the words used *within* that page/post are of the same ‘family’ so-to-speak. So instead of keyword density it actually starts to figure out whether you know what you are talking about, even if the page/post isn’t related to the rest of what’s on the website. We’ll see.

By: Anthony

Anthony — Thu, 26 Jul 2007 11:44:15 +0000

John Chow’s situation is a bit different because he has been so openly soliciting links. That’s just Google being Google and making an example for the rest of us that this is not the way they want things to work.

In my humble opinion links are still gold. While personal sites, link blogs and tumblelogs will always struggle for high SERPs, the value of your links to other sites will not be diminished. The way I’ve read the literature is that G! identifies context for links is by the text around the link.

You are definitely right to care about more about unique visitors as well as comments and incoming links more so than search engine visitors. Google is a bitch of a master.

By: Jeane Goforth

Jeane Goforth — Thu, 26 Jul 2007 09:08:00 +0000

I think that being confined to contextual links would be extremely limiting. The best ideas often come from unexpected places. It’s the cross-pollination that makes the Internet such a powerful tool.