Comments on: 2006 Pubcon in Vegas: Thursday site reviews

By: Chris Hooley

Chris Hooley — Mon, 28 Apr 2008 23:40:57 +0000

Hey Matt, thou shalt not speaketh about the DrinkBait without a Linketh to the Drinkbait! (especially when you even put the .com after it!). Hook me up man!

By: Sean Kassow

Sean Kassow — Sun, 25 Nov 2007 13:05:32 +0000

Although I agree in principy with what you’re saying, you’ve glossed over the importance of a large link network, which we all knew before there were any worthwhile search engines, which is TRAFFIC without the search engine itself.

Nice post, Matt! Very helpful. In fact the entire concept of a site review – especially at the hands of such knowledge people as yourself, Sullivan, et all – must have been wonderful to watch. Sorry I misseed it – maybe next time.

By: Anime

Anime — Sat, 17 Nov 2007 10:48:52 +0000

Seemingly there are a lot of people that are using the “If i throw enough darts, one of them is bound to hit the target” philosophy. Although I do manage a number of sites, 12 or so atm, all of them get a similar amount of attention with me managing them and a team of writers who work on content with me.

I was wondering what you would call an optimum number of sites to be running for one person. eg. should there be one full time member of staff per site, or is having one writer, researching and writing good quality information for me to publish on 3 sites enough.

By: Julian

Julian — Sun, 21 Oct 2007 17:26:30 +0000

Hi
I have read you comments Matt, but there is nothing definitive to answer my question which I am sure many others also wonder about.

I have a .com web site that is hosted in the US for cost reasons.

I also have registered .co.uk and .ie domains for the same domain.

The .ie is hosted in Ireland and the .co.uk is hosted in US I think.

All domains 301 redirect to the .com address.

Obviously hosting a duplicate site in Ireland and the UK will lead to problems and not only that its almost impossible to manage three separate websites.

What is the best solution to this to get good rankings for .com, .co.uk and .ie results in google?

By: ev

ev — Sat, 06 Oct 2007 22:34:53 +0000

Was there a reason specifically or some obvious constraint I’m missing? AThank lso, any idea on what document.matchAll() will return in the next generation of browsers? Thanks for the library, we need more devs with your approach…

By: Pioneer

Pioneer — Tue, 02 Oct 2007 09:01:23 +0000

Thanks for the post! I have been working to convince some people that reciprocal linking isn’t useful for established sites (especially when the linking goes to sites that are completely unrelated) so you’ve given me a little more ammunition!
http://www.audiophile.pl

By: kale kapi

kale kapi — Fri, 28 Sep 2007 09:56:25 +0000

DOM elements. Was there a reason specifically or some obvious constraint I’m missing? AThank lso, any idea on what document.matchAll() will return in the next generation of browsers? Thanks for the library, we need more devs with your approach…

By: satılık kiralık daire

satılık kiralık daire — Sun, 16 Sep 2007 20:53:06 +0000

DOM elements. Was there a reason specifically or some obvious constraint I’m missing? Also, any idea on what document.matchAll() will return in the next generation of browsers? Thanks for the library, we need more devs with your approach.

By: Julio Marketing de Sites

Julio Marketing de Sites — Fri, 14 Sep 2007 20:44:05 +0000

Good read Matt. I also agree that content only is diffcult specially if you do not market it. I am really waiting for the next update to see if google will change the way SEO is done.

By: Chris

Chris — Tue, 11 Sep 2007 20:44:58 +0000

Matt,
Also what kind of penalty could have this inflicted on our site and what is the best way to tell if it has been removed. We did notice a increase in our google rankings once Oracle removed us from that URL grouping however we were making all kinds of changes at that time.
Thanks again,
Chris