Temporal Linky Analysis
That clever bugger orion is at it again..
Way beyond me im afraid but I kinda got the basics of what he's talking about, and no nosebleed this time Hooray!
If your a member of the search geek star trekkers club then you'll most likely enjoy this one. Personally the only theories that interest me are theories on current/imminent algos not hypothetical/proposed ones but im a simple lad so...
Although this post does have some internal strife/bickering, there is some fantastic information on the downsides and strategies that can be used for Pay-per-Click advertising. Even a long-time user of PPC will find some tasty tidbits of information that can be put to use right away in this thread. Of particular interest are the lists of factors that can affect performance, and the measurement SEOs should be aware of to help calculate, track and learn from their SEO campaigns.
Finding ALL your Links!
clasione from SEOChat describes a method he uses to find links to his website. Others chime in with their opinions and their own methodology for finding the pages and sites that link to them. A very valuable concept and one that definitely needs a more robust tool to analyze and report.
Keyword Density: How Much Is Too Much
This thread, started back in August but recently revived, at WebProWorld starts off pretty well but 2/3's into the first post takes a dramatic nose dive as site admin CRich starts talking about sites being banned for too high KW density. If you can filter out the wild conjectures and outright rubbish however, it's a good read. Has some nice links to other threads at other forums also.
Spam can occur when your density exceeds what is the necessary amount to gain a respectable ranking.
Calculating Deep Link Ratio Using Yahoo
I just found this at researchbuzz (credited with the threadlink above) The article was written in Sept but apparently slipped most folks by, shame! - It's an absolute cracker of an seo tool devised by Roger Smolski of Text Link Ads that should add just one more nice tool to the seo essentials. At the time of writing i've only played around with it a little but my gut feeling is that it'll be damn useful in scoping out the competion at the very least.
Calculating Your Deep Link Ratio
"The DLR is defined as the ratio (expressed as a percentage) of a sites internal pages inbound links to the total inbound links."
The above link contains a step by step explanation of how to calculate this metric and some explanation of it's possible uses, here's a short excerpt:
It is based on the assumption that (in general), site wide text links placed on sites with extensive deep linking produce higher click-through ratios than those placed on sites with few or no deep links. This is our experience but like so many other factors in off-page optimisation virtually impossible to prove. As is another intuitively correct and similar premise that search engine algorithms show a preference for sites with extensive deep linking.
Im not waiting for somebody else to post this at Threadwatch, so im breaking my ideal of not posting my own threads again!
Fantomasters original post was somewhat buried in an odd thread about 302 redirects. The somewhat legendary industrial strength cloaker, Ralph Tegtmeier of Fantomaster.com kindly allowed me to quote his post in a new thread at SEW and ask some questions.
Never mind the bollocks, here's a quote to whet your appetite:
On SE's detecting professionally cloaked sites:
detecting cloaking reliably typically requires
quite a bit of manpower. Sure you can pre-filter cloaking indicators
automatically, e. g. by accessing and saving the site first as a search engine
spider and following this visit up via some unknown IP not identified as a
search engine spider. However, simply comparing the content automatically
isn't reliable: there's so many sites out there displaying dynamic content,
it can be real nightmare discerning what is actually legit by the SEs' standards
and what isn't. Moreover, there's browser specific content delivery,
printer-friendly pages, etc. etc.
All this will incur massive overhead in the personnel department and, hence,
will blow up costs. Considering that you'd have to cover billions of pages to
weed out all cloakers, it only stands to reason that the search engines, while
certainly not endorsing the practice, prefer to view cloaked sites as just so
much tolerable white noise in their search results.
So while the risk is indeed real, to all practical purposes it's more of an
Do yourself a favour, take that damn hat off, whatever color it may be and get on over there and read it, facinating stuff, thanks Ralph!
Using Google's new software on a shared computer at the Google booth at the Digital Life trade show floor I was able to easily search for, find, and read private Yahoo e-mail sent on the computer by previous users earlier in the day.
Marissa Mayer, Google's director of consumer Web products, told me she wasn't surprised. "This is not a bug, rather a feature," she says. Google always intended people to be able to index and search Web-based e-mail viewed and composed on PC, she says. Google Desktop Search is not intended to be used on computers that are shared with more than one person, she says.
Whether or not Google intended this, I take great pause at knowing any e-mail I write or read on a PC with Google Desktop Search could be called up and read by a complete stranger.
Thanks to inlogicalbearer who posted the link in this thread over at SEW
Alt Tags and Title Limitations
This thread started out with a bit of a weird post, but took a turn for the better by the third post as the purpose and intent of Alt attributes were further discussed. Plus I got a chance to say "make your site be the best it can be for your users and the search engines" again! :)
Is google gunning for directory sites? - Some of the guys and girls over at V7N seem to think so..
Stoner3221 of Wow Directory posts a long list of sites that he says were hit by G in recent days. Speculation abounds as to why with Stoner3221 theorizing that it's due to large amounts of affiliate links and general poor quality.
For the record, i run only one small directory which i've abandoned till the new year, it's doing just fine...
At the time of writing, im the only one to have replied to this excellent post by newly appointed SEW moderator Orion, but keep an eye on this one in coming days. My Threadwatch funny bone tells me it's gonna be a cracker! - IMO this is most likely the future of link analysis and thus the future of SEO. - The thread discusses an understandable write up (thank [insert diety of choice] for that!) entitled Page Layout Drives Web Search
Current Academic Link Analysis Research
High level of discussion surounding some papers linked in the first post from johnser. Oustanding speculative musings on the many different theories on current trends in SE link analysis from members Oliver Henniges and claus. This snippet to give you a taster of the level of discussion in here from Oliver Henniges:
I was always wondering what the 'related:'-search command was good for, since it mainly seemd to mirror odp-structures. Now, with Menczer basing their "semantic-similarity"-coefficient on distance within the odp-tree (which is not a tree), I getthe feeling that such issues have been incorporated in some way into the ranking-algos, thereby lowering the impact of backlinks and PR. This would explain why - as pointed out elsewhere - so many dmoz-dupes and pseudo-directories polluted recent search results on less-competitive terms. If this be the case i would estimate current state of google findings as a first approach to such cluster-analysis, imperfect, and to be improved in the near future.
Im way to stupid to get most of it, but then it is late in Denmark so i'll have another go in the morning! Great stuff guys...
Slickest Link Building Tricks
Here's a thread started in August this year. It's just been revived by fathom thus making it worthy of including here as an active discussion. Check out this little gem from massa aka. Bob Massa of Search King fame:
#1. By far, of these three slick ways, this is the slickest.
Pissing people off using graphics and obscure phrases, (usually taken out of context), so that when the pisseee, (or their cronies), wants to discuss it, they have little choice but to link to the page. Do it correctly and the anchor text is built in.
There's tons of the good stuff in this thread, a genuine "must read" for link builders.
I gave these guys a rough ride a few days ago for forum spamming. I've been taking a peek at the product and some of the threads and decided to give them a break ;-)
We all want links and finding link partners can be a harrowing task, once found we have to worry about neighborhoods, about reciprocal or three way, are we getting our money's worth etc etc...
There are and have been a few attempts at creating link exchanges and most just fade into obscurity. LinkitForward.com may very well go the same way but i've not seen anything cause this much forum activity in some time.
I invited the owner of LinkitForward to come have his say on 3 main points:
What's the story with the amateur forum spammers?
What is concept behind LinkitForward and
How the project is going so far
If you want to ask questions, take the forum thread above or ask balthazar [insert real name here heh..] here...
What's the fastest way to get incoming links?
Some tongue in cheek answers from some of the members over at WMW and some excellent queries to plug into Google to find places to submit.
This from martinibuster:
* Post something so dumb that bloggers will make derisive comments and link to you
* Post something funny (viral)
* Post hateful and venomous content that will make people hate you so much they will link to you and warn people not to visit
* Offer free downloads of sick videos and pics (one site
achieved a PR 9 doing this)
and my personal favorite one liner of the week from bad boy bakedjake
Dont miss the list on page 2, it's not as good as the one my friend Tim gave me [ner ner ner ner neeeer!] but it's pretty good..
If you dont know SEW member orian then let me tell you that this man leaves me spinning, I daren't open his damn paper, it'll give me a nose bleed...
The paper discusses a procedure for the online discovery of on-topic terms. Discovery is based on occurrence and co-occurrence information. It is demonstrated that on-topic analysis is a valuable tool for enabling users to enhance the semantics of theme sites and concept-focused documents. Specific applications to search engine marketing strategies and information retrieval systems are presented.
This is a long work involving competitive queries submitted by professional search engine marketing specialists. It introduces a methodology and procedure called on-topic analysis, which allows users to discover top, broader, narrower, and optimum terms. The notion of term distances is also presented.
(i am going to try to read it but i dont hold out much hope of understanding it ;-)