Comments on: No Optimizer Left Behind

By: Judd Exley

Judd Exley — Thu, 17 Apr 2008 03:31:38 +0000

If I thought it would get my competitors done for being naughty and get me more bidness, I’d happily have a standardised thingie that we should all adhere to. Not cos I’m a tattler, like that paste-eating fat asskisser in the front of the 5th grade class, I just have 4 mouths to feed.

As it is, I am playing as safe as I can… until that contract could get just that little bit bigger if I get that one ranking up…

Then, it’s get yer boots on, strap on yer six-shooters, and ride!

By: Ian

Ian — Thu, 10 Apr 2008 01:50:09 +0000

I hear Bush is launching the new ‘White House Task Force On Internets’…

By: Tony Wright

Tony Wright — Tue, 08 Apr 2008 21:19:16 +0000

Ok, fair enough…a set of industry standards may not be the right way to go – but what about a code of ethics…I’m envisioning modeling this after Realtors. You don’t have to be a Realtor to sell a house, but it sure does help.

The goal is to inform potential clients of how to avoid the sheisters that plague our industry. If you’ve ever talked to someone who has been “burned” by a bad SEO, you know what I mean.

By: Eric Itzkowitz

Eric Itzkowitz — Tue, 08 Apr 2008 19:20:37 +0000

Here’s the situation as I see it.

1. The government will NOT step in to regulate SEO anytime soon, if ever (most likely the later) because SEO is a function of MARKETING.

2. SEO is a function of MARKETING, which already has standards and regulations. You can be held liable for false advertising and engaging in illegal activities per your country’s, city’s, and local laws.

3. SEO comes in many flavors, which keeps our industry diverse and progressive. HOWEVER, any honest Marketer will inform his/her client about the risks and rewards of the various SEO tactics they can and will utilize to achieve a mutual definition of campaign success. Arm your client with appropriate information to let them determine their own risk tolerance; then proceed accordingly (see #2).

The moral of the story: Don’t be a dick.

- Eric Itzkowitz

By: morgan

morgan — Tue, 08 Apr 2008 17:00:31 +0000

As a former teacher, I fully agree with your analogy. Under NCLB, you are encouraged to teach to the test. The students’ education really isn’t that important, it’s whether they can pass the standardized tests. Who cares if they can coherently write a sentence, as long as they can recognize a split participle?

For anyone out there who’s watching the John Adams miniseriesâ€¦look at how the delegates at the Continental Congress acted when they were trying to get the Declaration of Independence written. It is encompasses everything except for working together! I definitely vote no for standards — they’ll be too weak and too pointless to have any real merit.

By: Norman Dickins

Norman Dickins — Tue, 08 Apr 2008 16:05:04 +0000

SEO can not be standardized for the simple reason that if its equal out in the open what would make website A rank ahead of website B assuming they both follow the same rules and standards?
SEO belongs to google and they keep it vague and unclear otherwise – what’s the point… If you’ve noticed the discussions/ blogs / forums/ advises etc.. are all based of the know : METAs, Content (301, duplicate content…) now links are back in the unknown and can not be discussed officially. Just read Vanessa Fox’s blog on how to create useful links… it is an insult to any intelligent person. Bottom link everybody knows about them Meta’s whats left is how much money you have to buy expensive links or you are just a lucky dude with and old aged website.

By: ourmonmouth

ourmonmouth — Tue, 08 Apr 2008 15:18:15 +0000

Michael – I agree with you that the industry does not need any licenses, regulation or legislation, but perhaps standardization could be a good idea. It has been painfully obvious that right now Google has dictated the standardization of SEO. Through its recent actions and public statements Google is in a state of hypocrisy.

Would you agree that W3C has done a good job in its mission? I think W3C is a fantastic resource to the community and perhaps there is an opportunity to standardize SEO. I know itâ€™s a long shot but stranger things have happened.

Frankly, I have enough leashes and one more might really choke!

By: 65 Ways To Get Traffic

65 Ways To Get Traffic — Tue, 08 Apr 2008 14:52:21 +0000

I completely agree.

Just because you have some sort of stupid certification does not mean you know anything. In this business it’s results that matters and nothing else.

I’m certain that there are many people out there who could do a kick butt job with search engine optimization but would never for whatever reason actually get the lame certification. Because of this some website owners would not think these un-certified individuals are as qualified as someone who has passed some silly written test.

I think in judging someone’s ability to do search engine optimization you need to look at their track record and see what they have actually accomplished.
What websites have they got to rank high in the search engines?

By: Jim

Jim — Tue, 08 Apr 2008 13:19:32 +0000

“Hell Yeah!”

By: Feydakin

Feydakin — Tue, 08 Apr 2008 13:12:46 +0000

I lump these into the same category as any other alphabet soup certification process.. I remember when these first started happening with the A+ certs and then Microsoft’s involvement.. What a great way to build brand loyalty, offer a Google cert, a Yahoo! cert, a MSN cert, charge $500 for each, and then make sure that the test includes arcane things that you will never see in the real world..

All it would take for this to happen is to Google step up and start a Google Certified SEO program.. You won’t be able to get a job without one because it has Google backing..