| 11:19 am on Oct 2, 2002 (gmt 0)|
And who uses them:
| 3:45 pm on Oct 2, 2002 (gmt 0)|
Or, in brief:
Not as useful as they used to be. Certainly not the "key" to good rankings.
But used enough by minor engines that it's worthwhile to include them.
| 3:53 pm on Oct 2, 2002 (gmt 0)|
I still include them.. but they really don't serve much of a purpose anymore. (Inks the only major player that still supports them) To quote the latest Search Engine Watch newsletter... "the meta keywords tag is dead, dead, dead"
On a side note... who says the WebmasterWorld source code your seeing is the same thing the SE's are seeing?
| 8:38 pm on Oct 2, 2002 (gmt 0)|
It would not surprise me if SEs saw something different from what is seen by users. If you perform a search on google for "site:webmasterworld.com keyword1 keyword2", the links you click will show keyword1 and keyword2 highlighted.
| 9:02 pm on Oct 2, 2002 (gmt 0)|
I only print metas for non-logged in visitors. Why waste 100-300 bytes of bandwidth (guess: 10-12 gig a year) for a marginal feature that members never need? I save the resources wherever possible. We are getting so downright huge now that those little savings really add up over time.
Bad moderator, Bad moderator. hehe
Se's see the same as other non-logged in people. Only difference is the random psa/comp ad routine in the upper right corner (se's don't care for random stuff every page). Other than that, it's 100% the same.
The same for non-logged in members that is - kinda tough for a bot to login yet, but I won't put it past them in the future. There are a bunch of differences there between logged in and not logged in visitors.
| 4:40 pm on Oct 8, 2002 (gmt 0)|
What a GREAT idea! I am gonna steal that idea for my site... (ok?)
| 6:47 pm on Oct 8, 2002 (gmt 0)|
Actually I have the copyright and patent that idea (which Brett pays for very handsomely for, I might add), so if you would like we could set up a monthly fee... :)
| 9:08 pm on Oct 8, 2002 (gmt 0)|
Please check your sticky- first payment enclosed! :)