Forum Moderators: open
Sure link-dropping is a problem, and I respect WebmasterWorld for handling that with courage. However, "professionally" I am looking for a place for case analyses, and as much as I feel it is natural to do that in this community it is not possible(?).
namewithheldreluctantly.com is a prime example. Sure that's like a link drop but let's be real - it is a new site with tremendous buzz , probably destined for the top, Alexa 65k after a few weeks and mostly pre-marketing-push. No link drop in the WebmasterWorld supporters forum is going to make a dent in their success.
On the other hand as a website operator/optimizer I want to discuss this thing NOW before it is everywhere. If something like that goes up I want to pick it apart with my peers AS IT TAKES OFF. Remember, I am not talking about a new site for which a WebmasterWorld link drop would be a tremendous boon for traffic. I am talking about a grokster or friendster or criagslist. See how I can mention those now without it being a problem? But who wants to talk about them? They are old hat...
Can WebmasterWorld devise a standard so this becomes possible? I don't think this is the same old "allow URLs" discussion. This is probablyof real interest to many.
Don't reply asking for anything via sticky either... that gets the thread deleted.
I have to admit this is the only reason I wander off to the three other top optimizer communities. Every time I do I end up staying quite a while, and every time I regret not seeing the familiar "personalities" up there. Perhaps it is time to spend more time over there to get to know them better?
But yesterday I was wishing I could see some examples of people who have used Brett's notorious 26 steps to 15K a day.
Custodian.
There are other venues.
I didn't say that URLs shouldn't be allowed. As an amateur, part-time webmaster I have more to gain than most from watching you experts analyse an example. But, my post was to say that I see the problem with allowing URLs.
IMHO, I wouldn't mind a pre-moderated case analysis forum for this purpose. As long as URLs were pre-screened, I don't think it's a problem and could be very beneficial. Real, working examples can be much, much better than abstract issues.
It would have to be pre-moderated though. And with that comes the normal pre-moderation BS - "why can't my site be reviewed?", "why do mods favor the big guys over the small guys?", "my site is l33t, you l0s3rs should review it", etc.
Also, another huge disadvantage is spam reporting. The potential forum could absolutely NOT become a method of spam reporting. And knowing some of the membership here, that concern is a big one for me.
Finally, there are liability issues with "review my site" type posts. The smaller boards can get away with it, IMHO, because they're still under the radar.
A forum like this would be a moderation nightmare. And I believe that's most likely the reason it hasn't been done to this point. You would have to verify that the member posting the "review my site" question really was involved with the site, and entity that owned the site in question really wanted it reviewed.
paybacksa, if you can think of a way to do this intelligently without causing the moderators involved a huge amount of work and effort for very little payback, I'd be happy to champion this cause for you with the staff.
But I can't think of a good way. And that saddens me, as I'm with you - I think it's one of the most helpful things we can do to teach new webmasters how it works.
[edited by: engine at 6:32 pm (utc) on Jan. 10, 2005]
[edited by: engine at 4:16 pm (utc) on Jan. 10, 2005]
Being able to discuss a specific site, in stead of talking theoretically and by innuendo would be something quite unique and so beneficial.
I would recommend making something in a separate area where you have to pay to participate in, that way those that are not serious about it would not be involved, or gain from it.
Yes, I agree choosing the site could be a very sticky wicket indeed. However, in terms of identifying spam sites for analysis; who cares except those that spam?
I see it adding more work for moderators and that's about it. Case analysis? Sounds like promotion of URL's to me... I can see nothing good coming out of it. Then you have to define what is case analysis and what is promotion, what is case analysis and putting someone elses site on the radar...on and on..
I certainly wouldn't want a site I am attached to be used for "case analysis". Ok, so then how would you prove the site is yours? If you could then that leads to either you are doing it for promotion of the url or "free" advice depending on the persons skill level.
Nothing against anyone... I just don't see it working here at WebmasterWorld.
What I thought was suggested was picking a site, one site to discuss over a period of time as things change. Maybe a good non-profit site that is not that in tune with SEO.
This way we can be able to say, "see the way that link on the third page is positioned.....", “notice the patterns of the text here…”. Right now you can’t really point to any specific examples the group can comment on.
You could have continuous discussion on it, over the course of a year.
What I thought was suggested was picking a site, one site to discuss over a period of time as things change. Maybe a good non-profit site that is not that in tune with SEO.This way we can be able to say, "see the way that link on the third page is positioned.....", “notice the patterns of the text here…”. Right now you can’t really point to any specific examples the group can comment on.
I understand what you are saying, but the problem with that is:
1. What if that website chosen never updates a thing for years?
2. What if the chosen website has "Promoting and Marketing by xyzcompany.com" plastered all over it?
3. 99% of the time you can trace positioning in Google to backlinks/anchor text - on page optimization can only take you so far, so I'm not sure what good it would really do.
trace
TC, you can. A new webmaster may not be able to, simply because he doesn't know how to.
Re: Google, Linking structures are very important. You know as well as anyone that it's not just "go out and get a bunch of links"; there are very subtle points in link development that matter.
On-page very much matters for Yahoo.
Most of the boards out there that offer "review my site" type things don't give out good information. They do concentrate on silly things that don't matter, or give generalized advice such as "you need more content". It would be nice to become known as the source for great information.
So how do the law schools and business schools handle it? I suppose they are not doing it in a "public forum" for one thing, and "after the fact".
Looking into my crystal ball...
"eTravelQuestExpeditionStories.com to be bought by Travel Conglomerate for $$ billion. Conglomerate looks forward to bring top SEO expertise on board"
The next day a WebmasterWorld thread starts
"SEO Case Study: What's so special about eTravelQuestExpeditionStories.com".
Several conclusions are drawn from expert community review:
eTravelQuestExpeditionStories.com has deployed tactics X and Y *combined*, and it apears to be working like a charm in Yahoo!
The next day BigConglomerate stock tanks, the deal is dissolved, and 17 new websites appear in the travel SERPs using the new "XoverY" tactic (and sharing the affiliate $$).
Gee, it sure would make WebmasterWorld more famous, no?
So perhaps there is an opportunity for an online SEO university, which could have case studies as interactive online content?
Agreed Jake, but that is not where the problem is at. The problem would be a month later when Martinibuster is wondering why he suddenly is cleaning 30 bogus links a week droped in his forum. Or tedster has to to double duty as people start to think site reviews are ok.
> case analyses
You simply will not get that in ANY form ANY where on the net unless you pay for the analysis and site review yourself. Is that what you are asking? For us to take another look at WebmasterWorld Answers from 1999 again?
Why do people seem to find it necessary that this ONE site be all things to everyone (or at least to the questioners....)? WebmasterWorld is a concrete example of "par excellence" in most of the areas with which I'm familiar (leaving SF out of the equation). If "you" need a "case study" forum, or something else equally esoteric, then maybe "you" should start one up.
No one place in this world (or the internet, far as that goes!) can be all things to all people....
Also, another huge disadvantage is spam reporting. The potential forum could absolutely NOT become a method of spam reporting. And knowing some of the membership here, that concern is a big one for me.
Ignoring the intended spam reporting effect, what happens when the case study is revealed to be backed by "black hat" shady practices? "Case study" becomes "Execution by jury" and WebmasterWorld would suffer in the end.
You simply will not get that in ANY form ANY where on the net unless you pay for the analysis and site review
I think it's possible to get it at WebmasterWorld, just not in the open. If you have a handful of folks who know each other via stickymail and regular posting in the forums, it only makes sense for them to collaborate on "case studies" for the benefit of that group. After enough time of helping each other, you might even be able to request a limited "site review" if you really want that kind of punishment. :)
Knowledge gained from those case studies can still be contributed back to the forums, just without naming names. It's the results and the method of gaining those results that matters, not the URL itself, right?
You simply will not get that in ANY form ANY where on the net unless you pay for the analysis and site review yourself. Is that what you are asking?
Jake I know what you are saying, but why is it anyone's responsibility to teach your competition the trade? I don't "do" clients anymore, but there are 1000's of companies that are in the business that don't have a clue. Why teach them something that many have worked long and hard for a thorough understanding? Brett is correct in the post I quoted - I used to charge for site analysis, competitive analysis, and recommendations reports. I'm sure there are 1000's of those who do (and I respect those that do it properly)- why do that for free? When information like this is available for free it devalues the trade IMHO, might not bother those in the limelight of the "case study", but it takes money out of others pockets. Knowledge is $ and whenever something is available for free there isn't much value placed on it. If everything becomes common knowledge... there is little value placed on it.
On-page very much matters for Yahoo.
As far as Yahoo the only people I know that do well consistently have a never ending supply of domains and spam the heck out of them. I haven't heard anyone that does really well in Yahoo and Google with the same site, but that's not saying they aren't out there. You either optimize for Google or Yahoo, but sites rarely perform well in both. Yahoo can love your site like a newborn baby one moment and treat it like a evil stepchild the next ;)
