I've been reading masses of opinions over the past few weeks and it strikes me that with so many conflicting opinions and contracditory evidence, what conclusions can the average webmaster draw?
It seems to me that the best tactic may be to just develop a site with plenty of good content, relevant titles, get the odp and yahoo listing and leave it at that.
I've seen plenty of sites developed in notepad reach the top of their SERPS without ever requesting a link or giving more than a relevant handful out.
I can accept that there exist webmasters and companies with genius techies and a hard-wroking team of web promoters who can get results. But for the average webmaster is his time not best spent in developing a good site? Especially when no one can agree on what works anyway?
Maybe I'm just naive...