jeremy_goodrich - 4:33 am on Mar 30, 2003 (gmt 0)

I thought I read a post where you said, "SEO - I feel so dirty" and now you sound like you like it.

What gives? "Never had any trouble optimizing for FAST..." great.

Did I say there was a problem with that? Or that I couldn't beat their algo? Nope.

And why would you bother optimizing, when there are products that will manage, automatically your XML CPC feed with them? If the product also managed your ROI then you would be all set, if you were sold something.

So I don't think many, if *any* SEO's that are into commercial goods would seriously waste their time, unless it was the XML program, to optimize specifically for their engine.

Better SERP's? OK. Sure. Didn't Google grow becuause it's results were 'better'...or am I missing something? If FAST results are better for you, great there seem to be a distinct lack of them around here. :)

Back to the topic of the lack of research paper indicating a lack of cohesion, I still think there is a strong case for that. After all, eliminating the SEO effect to the CPC deal (assuming there was ROI, if not, nobody would do anything, ya?) there should be little to no SEO result because people don't target that engine.

In a sense, then, their web data would be 'better' ya?...I still don't see them with a flock of loyal users, steadily gaining ground on Google. And wouldn't all of us 'geeks' here be into Alltheweb if they were the best?