On Mon, 28 May 2007 12:36:25 +0100, Roy Schestowitz
<EMAIL REMOVED> wrote:

>__/ [ Big Bill ] on Monday 28 May 2007 10:53 \__
>
>> On Mon, 28 May 2007 08:10:10 +0100, Roy Schestowitz
>> <EMAIL REMOVED> wrote:
>>
>>>I want to come back, but there is so much spam here. Virtually every OP
>>>comes from Google Groups... :-(
>>
>> We've had a hell of a lot of folk looking for you. None of them happy.
>
>:-(
>
>Oww... what did they say? Some of the people out there resist disrutpive
>technology with p***ion. Some do this for their wallet (can't be sure with
>companies that hand out Vista laptops to bloggers)...

I said hello every time but I must be on your k/f file cos you never
replied.
plh
paul

> But you're still here

I included most definitely... but my goal is to always evolve my SEO
character. That's what keeps me on my toes. I need to grow regularly
so I go to the search engine optimization experience; here. I go away
regularly too, but I always seem to make my way back.

It's not always easy to hang out here. Clashes between SEOs have
sprung from the origins of this code crunching trade table. There are
lessons learned along the way, from the debates and facing one's own
conflicts.

There is a time to stop and think things over again.

There is also a time to humbly move on from the bitter experiences
that so often steer us away from here.

On May 28, 9:02 am, canadafred <canadian_...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > But you're still here
>
> I included most definitely... but my goal is to always evolve my SEO
> character. That's what keeps me on my toes. I need to grow regularly
> so I go to the search engine optimization experience; here. I go away
> regularly too, but I always seem to make my way back.
>
> It's not always easy to hang out here. Clashes between SEOs have
> sprung from the origins of this code crunching trade table. There are
> lessons learned along the way, from the debates and facing one's own
> conflicts.
>
> There is a time to stop and think things over again.
>
> There is also a time to humbly move on from the bitter experiences
> that so often steer us away from here.

Me a newbie, but was very regular here few weeks ago, but i find this
spam crap hard to digest, why cant they find traffic somewhere else,
someone tell them or is it the bane of google groups.......learnt a
lot here......little difficult not to peep in once a while

Roy Schestowitz wrote:

> I want to come back, but there is so much spam here. Virtually every OP
> comes from Google Groups... :-(

Interesting how Google is anti-spam yet is responsible for so much of it.


--
http://pocketseo.com/

Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>
> I want to come back, but there is so much spam here. Virtually every OP comes
> from Google Groups... :-(


I just ignore them. There are still good folks here. One thing, though,
i wrote a post on word tracker versus google trends and no one replied!
I mean nobody. That was not what i expected. Here is the post again, and
if you have any comments, i would like to hear them:

-----

Subject: trends vs. tracker
Date: Wed, 23 May 2007 09:46:49 -0700
From: catherine yronwode <EMAIL REMOVED>
Organization:Herb Magic
Newsgroups: alt.internet.search-engines

Having had some success in times past with word tracker, i just dipped
into google trends -- a far more interesting site due to its graphical
interface, but also less poductive of numerics.

Plus -- it uses actual google as its resource, which partically
compensates for the total lack of numerics.

Plus -- it tracks three year trends, not just a recent snapshot.

Neutral -- the news benchmark is interesting but so far has not affected
any of my key terms. However, i did try working the news benchmark
against searches on some media terms (e.g. <britney spears> and saw its
application to those who might happen to work in that field of endeaor.

Plus -- it allows for boolian operations (e.g. <pagan -jose> to
partially isolate pagan religious content from jose pgan sports
content).

Minus -- it makes no suggestions; you have to work off your own keyword
lists (mine were generated by word tracker)

Plus -- up to 5 comparisons at a time.

Minus -- without numerics and with only 5 comparisons per query, you
have to run and re-run sets of comparisons to create a graded list of
search term popularity -- a real time-waster, that.

A tip -- establish some benchmarks of your own when working with
relative (non numeric) comparisons. I used the terms <ebay>, <help>, and
<learn> as high benchmarks, and i also had specific benchmark terms in
my field located at middle and lower levels -- your own field's
benchmark terms will vary by what you are trying to accomplish, of
course.

Neutral -- the graphical charts are relative (since there are no
numerics) and there is an appearance of artificial flattening on
lower-volume search terms when comparing a popular term against a series
of less popular terms.

A tip -- if flattening occurs, replace the highest scoring benchmark
term with a lower scoring benchmark, to see detailed trends on lower
popularity keyword terms.

Minus -- the order of the 5 terms is important -- if the first term in
the comma-delimited string is too low to score, the entire set of 5
comparisons will come up blank.

A tip -- keep a banchmark at the beginning of the string to avoid query
failures due to some terms being too low to score if they were in first
place.

A final plus -- pretty colour choices.

All in all, despite the time wasted on having to make comparisons, and
the fact that you must generate a list terms off-site becuase it will
not make suggestions, this is still an attractive feature and one well
worth using.

Any other comments, tips, or suggestions would be greatly appreciated.

cat yronwode
http://www.luckymojo.com/hoodoo.html
help youself learn love, money, protection, and lucky spells

__/ [ Paul B ] on Monday 28 May 2007 16:33 \__

> On Mon, 28 May 2007 12:36:25 +0100, Roy Schestowitz
> <EMAIL REMOVED> wrote:
>
>>__/ [ Big Bill ] on Monday 28 May 2007 10:53 \__
>>
>>> On Mon, 28 May 2007 08:10:10 +0100, Roy Schestowitz
>>> <EMAIL REMOVED> wrote:
>>>
>>>>I want to come back, but there is so much spam here. Virtually every OP
>>>>comes from Google Groups... :-(
>>>
>>> We've had a hell of a lot of folk looking for you. None of them happy.
>>
>>:-(
>>
>>Oww... what did they say? Some of the people out there resist disrutpive
>>technology with p***ion. Some do this for their wallet (can't be sure with
>>companies that hand out Vista laptops to bloggers)...
>
> I said hello every time but I must be on your k/f file cos you never
> replied.

No, no filter. I probably saw that.

--
~~ Best regards

Roy S. Schestowitz | HTML is for page layout, not for textual messages
http://Schestowitz.com | Free as in Free Beer ¦ PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
Load average (/proc/loadavg): 0.71 0.78 0.62 2/132 28311
http://iuron.com - semantic search engine project initiative

Roy Schestowitz wrote:


> I want to come back, but there is so much spam here. Virtually every OP
> comes
> from Google Groups... :-(

Well, lookie who's back!

If you want to come back, you're welcome. And where were you, by the way?
Anything worth sharing?

As far as spam goes, it just follows the money. SEO/SEM is a business
loaded with money these days and so spam is most expected. I think it's
time to develop an extra layer of thick skin and just move on. Spam is
rather easy to spot, too: just watch for words "Free", "PayPal" and "[$]*"

As for Google Groups, I'll pretend I did not read this negatively charged
sentence you wrote :-) I can't believe you would want to cut the flow of
"fresh blood" into this group. Once the last dinosaur reading Usenet on an
NNTP client dies (pardon me, I meant "retires") how do you expect young
people to even have a clue the group exists?

Besides, I haven't checked that but I have a feeling that more spam is
posted with NNTP clients than with GG because spammers are a quite a bit
tech savvier than most internet users.

--
Cheers,
Dmitri
See Site Sig Below



--
+------------------------------------------------+
| Follow alt.internet.search-engines threads |
| with your Firefox Live Bookmarks! Set it up at |
| http://www.1-script.com/forums/ |
+------------------------------------------------+

__/ [ www.1-script.com ] on Tuesday 29 May 2007 05:47 \__

>
> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>
>
>> I want to come back, but there is so much spam here. Virtually every OP
>> comes
>> from Google Groups... :-(
>
> Well, lookie who's back!
>
> If you want to come back, you're welcome. And where were you, by the way?
> Anything worth sharing?

I concentrated on fewer newsgroups, then got more deeply involved in Digg and
Netscape. I have almost completely given up on mailing lists. It seems like
the way information is exchanged is evolving (and, no, I won't use that
stupid "Web 2.0" buzzword *smile*). Just look what happened to E-mail,
mainly because of botnets.

> As far as spam goes, it just follows the money. SEO/SEM is a business
> loaded with money these days and so spam is most expected. I think it's
> time to develop an extra layer of thick skin and just move on. Spam is
> rather easy to spot, too: just watch for words "Free", "PayPal" and "[$]*"

A mental whitelist seems to work best in AISE. The regulars are still here.

> As for Google Groups, I'll pretend I did not read this negatively charged
> sentence you wrote :-) I can't believe you would want to cut the flow of
> "fresh blood" into this group. Once the last dinosaur reading Usenet on an
> NNTP client dies (pardon me, I meant "retires") how do you expect young
> people to even have a clue the group exists?

Yes, I know. Maybe they are (again) a victim of their own success, but in
general, Google Groups staff has been disturbingly unresponsive in the past,
even when I complained to them about personal abuse and identity theft.
Yahoo, on the other hand, took immediately action. So did Digg.

> Besides, I haven't checked that but I have a feeling that more spam is
> posted with NNTP clients than with GG because spammers are a quite a bit
> tech savvier than most internet users.

Maybe they /all/ just use NNTP and spoof headers to toss the blame at Google.
No, I'm just kidding...

--
~~ Best regards

Roy S. Schestowitz
http://Schestowitz.com | RHAT GNU/Linux ¦ PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
run-level 5 Apr 28 15:45 last=S
http://iuron.com - help build a non-profit search engine

"PocketTwat" <EMAIL REMOVED> wrote ...

>> I want to come back, but there is so much spam here.
>> Virtually every OP comes from Google Groups... :-(
>
> Interesting how Google is anti-spam yet is responsible for so much of it.

Yup; Google is responsible for global warming, whaling, pestilience,
even your stupidity.
--

Andrew
Editor
http://www.seo2seo.com/
First things first - but not necessarily in that order.

On Tue, 29 May 2007 03:33:09 +0100, Roy Schestowitz
<EMAIL REMOVED> wrote:

>__/ [ Paul B ] on Monday 28 May 2007 16:33 \__
>
>> On Mon, 28 May 2007 12:36:25 +0100, Roy Schestowitz
>> <EMAIL REMOVED> wrote:
>>
>>>__/ [ Big Bill ] on Monday 28 May 2007 10:53 \__
>>>
>>>> On Mon, 28 May 2007 08:10:10 +0100, Roy Schestowitz
>>>> <EMAIL REMOVED> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>I want to come back, but there is so much spam here. Virtually every OP
>>>>>comes from Google Groups... :-(
>>>>
>>>> We've had a hell of a lot of folk looking for you. None of them happy.
>>>
>>>:-(
>>>
>>>Oww... what did they say? Some of the people out there resist disrutpive
>>>technology with p***ion. Some do this for their wallet (can't be sure with
>>>companies that hand out Vista laptops to bloggers)...
>>
>> I said hello every time but I must be on your k/f file cos you never
>> replied.
>
>No, no filter. I probably saw that.

No worries.
Good to see you are back, and that you're not gay
take care
plh
Paul
--
http://www.crystalbuffalo.com/americ...external2.html

----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----