| 10:11 am on Sep 28, 2003 (gmt 0)|
hotbot.co.uk used to be one of the best. Pure Ink Feed.
| 10:13 am on Sep 28, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Now that was quick - thanks caine!
.co.uk -> and that's not filtered (geo / uk)?
| 10:15 am on Sep 28, 2003 (gmt 0)|
| 10:16 am on Sep 28, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Thanks heini, that's what i thought / mentioned (PT's).
So which is the "purest"? ;)
I see the thread has been moved. Didn't post it here since i didn't ask for paid but for both - free and paid - results.
| 10:21 am on Sep 28, 2003 (gmt 0)|
PT is pure, but only in itself, once it gets to the portals then weights are applied.
.co.uk hotbot -> go non regional, and this is / or certainly used to be 100 % pure results / through an engine.
| 10:23 am on Sep 28, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Ok, i gonna check both and compare the results over time. Thanks!
| 10:37 am on Sep 28, 2003 (gmt 0)|
I think that is the best bet, let me know how you get on -> certainly in the near future, i would like to follow suit, as whats good for G and ATW - no longer seems to fit the bill on INK. Assuming one works with a one size fits all site.
| 4:50 am on Oct 7, 2003 (gmt 0)|
I checked PT to check the INK position of my main site. At #1 is my site, but not the one I expected.
The one page site that shows up was the result of a joke. I copied the index page of my main site, changed the title and linked it from one page in my main site to test anchor text on Google and it shows up #1 on INK.
Is Ink really this bad? BTW, my other site, which is spidered regularly by Ink is nowhere to be found.
| 9:54 am on Oct 7, 2003 (gmt 0)|
The BBC's website has a UK filtered Inktomi feed, if anyone wonders how well they are doing in the UK.