| 12:12 pm on Oct 15, 2002 (gmt 0)|
things change chris,
by the time you digest all the things which aren't common sense the rules have change.
It will always be the case example for lots of quick traffic get a paid inclusion into inktomi was very true once but look at what partners they have lost.
you have to be in the game 24/7 do you want be an on-line business or an seo. a lot of on-line businesses are to involved in the day to day running to be concerned about googles new algo
| 1:03 pm on Oct 15, 2002 (gmt 0)|
Anybody can sit in front of a Piano bashing the keys and make some noise.
But it takes talent, dedication and practice to produce quality music.
[edited by: Woz at 1:17 pm (utc) on Oct. 15, 2002]
| 1:06 pm on Oct 15, 2002 (gmt 0)|
Agreed. Big difference between the weekend webmaster and someone that spends all day every day doing it.
Personally I think they're great. I've built a few sites for people that thought they could do it themselves. They tend to appreciate your work more ;)
| 1:11 pm on Oct 15, 2002 (gmt 0)|
I didn't see that point of view. It was just a question that has been bugging me because I woke up with it on my mind in the middle of last night.
| 1:16 pm on Oct 15, 2002 (gmt 0)|
It's a good topic.
Another facet of it would be the fact that any muppet can write a guide. They're not always very good and, when taken as gospel by joe punter may do more harm than good.
| 1:22 pm on Oct 15, 2002 (gmt 0)|
|anyone, with half a brain and a bit of time, do SEO themselves. Will there be a need for any professionals in the future. |
The day you find someone who have the same knowledge and record as Brett, RC, Mikkle, MakeMeTop, and on, trought a guide you tell me ;)
SEO is not an easy thing yes there might be 10,000 people doing it but there are very few who is good at it.
There is always different levels of knowledge, and sure there might be guides how to be #1 on Google for "fuzzy blue widget at pubcon" but to be #1 for widgets, you need more than a guide.
And as i pointed out in another thread, it takes a very long time to learn the whole base of SEO.
I talked to a person at PubCon (feel free if you want to post about it), he said that he had about 35% of SE traffic from Google, if he had more than 40% he would be afraid (and we are not talking 50 visitors a day).
TO be able to do that you need a lot of knowledge and brain.
[edited by: lazerzubb at 1:24 pm (utc) on Oct. 15, 2002]
| 1:24 pm on Oct 15, 2002 (gmt 0)|
[webmasterworld.com...] If you get any more sleeping problems.
I had a friend who wrote a help guide much like the one you are talking about, took me about 15 minutes to explain to him that what he was writing about was incorrect, (it was meant to be a HTML guide, but most of the code was invalid that he tried to showcase in the guide)!
| 1:37 pm on Oct 15, 2002 (gmt 0)|
Learning to be a webmaster is hard enough!
The best guides(few and far between) are an invaluable source for bods like me.
Although to get the most out of online guides they could do with some sort of forum ;)
| 1:40 pm on Oct 15, 2002 (gmt 0)|
I think the key difference between SEO and other technical disciplines is the rapidly changing environment and the largely undocumented and nebulous knowledge base. If you learned Perl or Win2K server administration a few years ago and took an extended holiday, your skills would still be current today. That just isn't the case for SEO.
I think a guide that tells people the basics could serve webmasters well - the simple things, like making your navigation links spiderable, putting an appropriate title on each page, etc. But for the next level, you really need to participate in a community like this and engage in your own continuing research. A good guide could help webmasters avoid the worst mistakes, but certainly won't replace the services of an experienced SEO professional. A bad guide will offer optimization techniques that were effective in the past, but are now ineffective or even dangerous.
| 1:49 pm on Oct 15, 2002 (gmt 0)|
There are two basic kinds of people. Those that are the do-it-yourselfer types and those that don't have time.
Which group is more profitable?
Teaching someone else to do what you do and getting them to create your guides (as a final exam) and using these as learning modules to group 1, seems to be much more profitable and much less time consuming.
| 3:58 pm on Oct 15, 2002 (gmt 0)|
Guides are good until you have to deal with something outside the guide. (Girl Guides are also good until you seduce them to the dark side)
| 4:14 pm on Oct 15, 2002 (gmt 0)|
> Therefore, are they killing the industry by letting anyone, with half a brain and a bit of time, do SEO themselves. Will there be a need for any professionals in the future.
No way. They are not killing the industry. Would you say that making source code available weakens the programming industry? No, it makes it stronger, because it increases the base of potential experts.
In general, making more knowledge more available can never hurt the industry.
It hurts quasi-SEO professionals, who used to benefit from the total lack of guides and tutorials and were making a lot of money selling rather primitive techniques and methods as hi-tech stuff...
| 4:32 pm on Oct 15, 2002 (gmt 0)|
This is sometimes known as 'giving away the farm', though after a few weeks 95% will go back to the city and hire a farm manager ;-)
The other 5% would have taken it up seriously anyway, strictly IMO, of course.
| 4:47 pm on Oct 15, 2002 (gmt 0)|
totally agree starec.
How many web sites are there -- how many SEO'ers (professional or otherwise)
A few million sites per SEO (at minimum) isn't nearing on saturation any time soon.
Those that are worth their salt will likely prosper and the remainder >> will advertise "We can get you submitted to 300,000 search engines for only $49.95" will likely make alot too.
| 5:18 pm on Oct 15, 2002 (gmt 0)|
I think that type of thought is ignorant.
All the information on the net has changed my and many others lives. It has allowed me to learn virtually anything I wanted, instead of having to go to libraries and classes.
There is so much to learn and so much to do in this world, that sharing information is the least you can do to help your fellow man. A prime example of this, people posting advice and info on this board that could easily be charging big $$ for and could be considered "trade secrets". The reason they do it is the free exchange of info.
Open-source code is another excellent example...
| 6:58 pm on Oct 15, 2002 (gmt 0)|
|I think that type of thought is ignorant. |
Not sure what you are referring to.
Yet we do not live in a totally free society -- unhappily, I do need to work for a living, don't you?
|There is so much to learn and so much to do in this world, that sharing information is the least you can do to help your fellow man. |
Many people here do both - the simply fact is there isn't 6 billion members at WebmasterWorld which means that not everyone has the luxury of being in the know. <added>Free is not always good, in todays marketplace -- "if it's too good to be true it usually isn't" regardless of how good your intentions are.</added>
|A prime example of this, people posting advice and info on this board that could easily be charging big $$ for and could be considered "trade secrets". |
|The reason they do it is the free exchange of info. |
hmmm... some do, some don't.
My personal opinion -- the web and everything that goes with it, is very much a new medium, and no single person has all the right answers. Therefore, until this medium becomes of age... and rules are cast in stone (1 way only!) you are only as good as the best community with lots of varying opinions to help keep you grounded so you stumble "less".
|Open-source code is another excellent example... |
Open source isn't exactly free -- you do pay for the support.
| 6:26 am on Oct 16, 2002 (gmt 0)|
English needs to be able to translate "logiciel libre" in such a way that it doesn't translate back into "logiciel gratuit". (Pardonnez mon ecriture, svp. Je vous jure que ce n'est pas bon en anglais non plus.)
| 7:08 am on Oct 16, 2002 (gmt 0)|
|I do need to work for a living, don't you? |
I also work for a living, in a profession were many will not share information and in fact deliberately distribute false information. This does not mean that this is correct. I feel alot of satisfaction from helping my fellow man (especially woMAN) ;), and sharing any info or knowledge that I have.
I believe if we all have equal information, some will still rise above others. Some care more, some will want to learn more, and some just have more cognitive power. Either way, hoarding information does not help you.
A prime example of this, people posting advice and info on this board that could easily be charging big $$ for and could be considered "trade secrets".
|Open source isn't exactly free -- you do pay for the support |
Not to say I understand who I can call, paid or not, for help re-writing the Perl compiler. What I meant is that open-source is an excellent example of the free exchange of information. Source-code is a very valuable resource, and the fact that it is available for all to learn from for free, IMHO is amazing. Same with the recent MIT coursework being published for all, amazing stuff.
| 9:00 am on Oct 16, 2002 (gmt 0)|
|I also work for a living, in a profession were many will not share information and in fact deliberately distribute false information. This does not mean that this is correct. |
I agree totally.
However, I drive a car but have no knowledge or skill in car repair/up-keep.
I therefore take it to a mechanic and my only expectations are:
Fair trustworthy service and I also expect to paid.
Knowledge and skill go hand in hand, and not everyone has the time or incline to learn even when the resources are freely available. If I spend 10 years develop superb knowledge does this mean it should be worth "less" because someone else didn't, couldn't or wouldn't take the time to learn.
The ball is in my court, if I chose to provide free advice I can, but I am not obligated to provide this to everyone.
WebmasterWorld and Open source isn't that different. The choice is that of the provider and not the receiver. It just so happens that most (here) are both a provider and a receiver, and that is what makes it work so well.
But I do agree with you in principle. :)
| 6:07 pm on Oct 17, 2002 (gmt 0)|
When easy to use desktop publishing software became available in the early 90's, professional graphic designers had a panic... on the one hand, the software made their jobs a lot easier... on the other hand, would they have jobs in five years if everyone learned to use it?
Needless to say, people still pay professional designers to put together their ads and business cards, because while a step-by-step guide and some good software may make a task possible for anyone with a computer, the talent and dedication that separates professionals from amateurs is most often reflected in the end result.
| 6:45 pm on Oct 17, 2002 (gmt 0)|
I totally agree mivox. Well put.