.'Just keep in mind to contribute in a positive way, rather than spamming or soliciting for your site.' - Google
I'd agree with that. However, this seems to be a tip for people promoting their own site (who know their business and could contribute to relevant discussion), rather than people promoting it on their behalf.
Most link building you see tends to be very badly written - which may be just that the good stuff I don't notice. Do you have an example of any link building writing you have done for a client?
And, obviously, a lot of people just use paid links. What is your opinion on that?
(I'd agree with that. However, this seems to be a tip for people promoting their own site (who know their business and could contribute to relevant discussion), rather than people promoting it on their behalf.
Most link building you see tends to be very badly written - which may be just that the good stuff I don't notice. Do you have an example of any link building writing you have done for a client?
And, obviously, a lot of people just use paid links. What is your opinion on that?
monkeon schmonkeon,
Tue 22 Jun 2010, 16:12,
archived)
Paid links is an awkward oneDefinitely not great as a long term strategy and in an ideal world shouldn't be used at all. Unfortunately in a lot of competitive industries (e.g. loans) for every 100 natural links you build through link bait, participation, etc. your competitor will simply buy £1000 using their bottomless pit of a marketing budget (some companies have in-house SEOs whose sole job it is to contact websites offering to buy links). So in these instances it's easy to go down the route of 'if you can't beat them, join them'.
I'll gaz you on the other point.
(,
Tue 22 Jun 2010, 16:30,
archived)
I'll gaz you on the other point.
Paid links are against the terms and conditions of search engine indexing...and therefore are to be avoided.
Saying that, the definition of a paid link is full of shades of grey. Arguably a company paying and agency to build links by hand is "paid linking", as is sending someone and iPad to review and saying they can keep it.
I draw the line at actual exchange of money (or goods with a monetary value) for a link. If the link is optional (ie: "here is a phone, keep it and review it - no link required"), I wouldn't say it was paid-for.
The key thing that you need to look for is transparency. An SEO should provide on demand, if it is not already part of the reporting, all activity that you have paid for (you have paid for it after all). SEOs that claim that they can't reveal their trade secrets and try to hide things from clients are charlatans.
There are no secrets in SEO - it is not rocket science. All the knowledge is out there to find, the challenge is staying on top of it and keeping up to date. The main difficulty is that it cuts across multiple disciplines; development, usability, hosting, copy-writing and accessibility all play a part in a quite eclectic specialisation that not everyone has the ability to master within the scope of their job (it can happen though).
(,
Tue 22 Jun 2010, 17:20,
archived)
Saying that, the definition of a paid link is full of shades of grey. Arguably a company paying and agency to build links by hand is "paid linking", as is sending someone and iPad to review and saying they can keep it.
I draw the line at actual exchange of money (or goods with a monetary value) for a link. If the link is optional (ie: "here is a phone, keep it and review it - no link required"), I wouldn't say it was paid-for.
The key thing that you need to look for is transparency. An SEO should provide on demand, if it is not already part of the reporting, all activity that you have paid for (you have paid for it after all). SEOs that claim that they can't reveal their trade secrets and try to hide things from clients are charlatans.
There are no secrets in SEO - it is not rocket science. All the knowledge is out there to find, the challenge is staying on top of it and keeping up to date. The main difficulty is that it cuts across multiple disciplines; development, usability, hosting, copy-writing and accessibility all play a part in a quite eclectic specialisation that not everyone has the ability to master within the scope of their job (it can happen though).
."development, usability, hosting, copy-writing and accessibility"
If someone is qualified in those areas, then I'd agree that it is a skilled job.
However, very few people seem that qualified (from my small sample of data).
(If someone is qualified in those areas, then I'd agree that it is a skilled job.
However, very few people seem that qualified (from my small sample of data).
monkeon schmonkeon,
Tue 22 Jun 2010, 17:31,
archived)
As I mentioned in my first foray into this thread, a good SEO has a deep knowledge of specific aspects of each of those fields, but will have a far from complete knowledge of each of them.
I know a lot about specific parts of an Apache install (mod_rewrite for example), but I doubt my ability to set up load-balanced servers.
Deep, specialist knowledge.
(,
Tue 22 Jun 2010, 17:51,
archived)
I know a lot about specific parts of an Apache install (mod_rewrite for example), but I doubt my ability to set up load-balanced servers.
Deep, specialist knowledge.
So asking an SEOtheir qualifications *is* a relevant question?
Other people are suggesting it is an irrelevance.
(Other people are suggesting it is an irrelevance.
monkeon schmonkeon,
Tue 22 Jun 2010, 18:22,
archived)
Qualifications no,Demonstrable knowledge, yes.
There are no qualifications (that I am aware of) that focus on the precise areas of interest.
You can gauge knowledge through demonstration tasks though, just like many developers do at interview.
(,
Tue 22 Jun 2010, 20:03,
archived)
There are no qualifications (that I am aware of) that focus on the precise areas of interest.
You can gauge knowledge through demonstration tasks though, just like many developers do at interview.
Demonstration tasks such as?This is another area where it seems hard to prove.
( monkeon schmonkeon,
Tue 22 Jun 2010, 20:40,
archived)
Some examples off the top of my head...Given the following URL to URL mapping list, write a regular expression for Apache's mod_rewrite in order to 301 redirect from the URLs in column A on the URLs in column B.
Brand X uses a corporate font for branding purposes and as such uses a lot of imagery on their site to convey content; create one example using just JavaScript and one example using pure CSS of a text/image replacement system that allows the imagery of a clickable link to be used for the majority of users but also presents the textual content to search engines and screen readers. Comment on which you would choose and why.
Describe four common methods of page redirection and include their advantages and disadvantages in relation to search engine indexing.
These are more technical examples. For content development, ask them to look at a site and recommend three content changes and three suggestions for new content development, complete with reasoning/justification.
(,
Tue 22 Jun 2010, 22:08,
archived)
Brand X uses a corporate font for branding purposes and as such uses a lot of imagery on their site to convey content; create one example using just JavaScript and one example using pure CSS of a text/image replacement system that allows the imagery of a clickable link to be used for the majority of users but also presents the textual content to search engines and screen readers. Comment on which you would choose and why.
Describe four common methods of page redirection and include their advantages and disadvantages in relation to search engine indexing.
These are more technical examples. For content development, ask them to look at a site and recommend three content changes and three suggestions for new content development, complete with reasoning/justification.
I guess the dead end hereis that you actually seem to have decent standards to work to and can justify your position.
I sincerely believe that most SEOs I've come across would fail the first two parts of your test.
I may just have met a bad bunch.
What percentage of SEOs do you think are charlatans?
(I sincerely believe that most SEOs I've come across would fail the first two parts of your test.
I may just have met a bad bunch.
What percentage of SEOs do you think are charlatans?
monkeon schmonkeon,
Tue 22 Jun 2010, 22:21,
archived)
I really have no idea.I tend to mix with peers in the industry and they tend to be pretty good. The best SEOs will be expensive and you won't be likely to find them working for Mrs Miggins' pie shop.
Charlatans might be a bit of a strong word (I know that I started it). A little local web development company won't cope with a large corporate site with a complex technology stack that integrates content serving, back-end warehouse control and an inventory count that runs to millions of products.
SEOs are the same. There are little outfits that serve local businesses - I wouldn't likely rate many of them on a corporate business scale. Then there are the big players. Some are good, some are not so good. Their credentials and case studies should let you judge them against each other.
As for individuals, it is impossible to tell what percentage are worth their salt. We have had people apply to us claiming to be experienced SEOs and they have just copied an essay from the internet as "proof" of their skills; a quick quoted search revealed him for what he was. Then again, we have had some great people apply who have stood up to scrutiny under interview and worked out very well.
(,
Tue 22 Jun 2010, 22:52,
archived)
Charlatans might be a bit of a strong word (I know that I started it). A little local web development company won't cope with a large corporate site with a complex technology stack that integrates content serving, back-end warehouse control and an inventory count that runs to millions of products.
SEOs are the same. There are little outfits that serve local businesses - I wouldn't likely rate many of them on a corporate business scale. Then there are the big players. Some are good, some are not so good. Their credentials and case studies should let you judge them against each other.
As for individuals, it is impossible to tell what percentage are worth their salt. We have had people apply to us claiming to be experienced SEOs and they have just copied an essay from the internet as "proof" of their skills; a quick quoted search revealed him for what he was. Then again, we have had some great people apply who have stood up to scrutiny under interview and worked out very well.