Can anyone recommend a good UK SEO guy?
Larry Law
website please.
mark | r
news:ch49lr$s5k$1...@hercules.btinternet.com...
> Looking to promote my site. Any ideas who is best perhaps a link to there
> website please.
it all depends what youre after if you want seo that generates loads of
traffic then you more than often have to sacrifice 'ethical practices' and
the possibility of being banned - otherwise employ an ethical seo that will
maybe not deliver as good a result.
mark
Eric Johnston
Tell us what your site is and we can consider it. Best regards, Eric.
SEO Dave
wrote:
Although there are shady SEO practices that can get a site traffic
quicker than 'ethical' SEO, over the long term you can do just as well
if not better than the best link spammer/clocker/hidden text ......
using SEO if you know what you are doing.
As I've said many times it's very, very easy to boost a site using
techniques that might get your sites banned long term, so if you are
going to run the risk why waste your money on an expensive SEO when
you can do it yourself.
Doesn't take a genius to go to Google and type Guestbook or blog to
find a few prominent link spammers and copy their links.
I'll give you an example or two.
LINK SPAMMING
------------------------
Lets say I was interested in the keyword Viagra (which I'm not, I
flattly deny I've been searching for a source all day :-)).
I might type Guestbook Viagra in google and get 180,000 results.
We'll take the first result-
algonet.se/~hubbabub/guestbook/guestbook.html (PR4)
First we can add a link or 50 there (you could add a link to every
page on your site in the body of the comment).
We look through the main page for a link to a Viagra site. We don't
have to look far as we have a winner - generic--viagra.biz/
We open the site and see it's PR4, not very good but what the hell
since PR hasn't updated for 70 days so could be PR7 by now. We check
the backlinks (with link:http://www.generic--viagra.biz/ in google)
and bingo almost 1000 results.
We now go through every one of those links looking for tell tale signs
of places to link spam (near enough all of them!).
So we load them up and post away.
You can do this over and over again and you don't have to stop there.
since you can post to any guestbook, blog or memberlist not just the
ones other Viagra link spammers have used. Pick another popular
spammed word and do the above again and again. Before you know it
you'll have 1000 links to your site.
Not exactly rocket science but very effective in the short term. Be
aware there is evidence sites doing this get banned from Google.
example 2
HIDDEN TEXT
---------------------
This is so easy to do, but some ways are much better than others. Most
SEOs (cough) who use this technique aren't smart enough to hide their
hidden work :-))
They'll use text in a font colour the same or very similar to the
background colour. This is very easy to spot by a competitor and so
report to Google etc...
So how does someone new to this use hidden text.
You go to http://inventory.overture.com/d/searchinventory/suggestion/
and type in your chosen phrase. Lets stick with Viagra since choosing
a new word would be HARD work :-))
You'll get a list like this-
326245 viagra
44449 viagra online
41645 order viagra
31567 generic viagra
17152 buy viagra
9368 viagra for woman
9049 cheap viagra
8484 buy viagra online
6668 viagra alternative
5752 herbal viagra
5261 female viagra
4132 free viagra
4025 viagra prescription
3606 free viagra sample
2849 viagra sample
2758 viagra on line
2665 viagra side effects
2652 discount viagra
2648 purchase viagra
2387 order viagra online
2239 natural viagra
2200 viagra pill
2079 viagra sale
1999 viagra sale online
1742 cheapest viagra
1718 viagra information
1639 viagra cialis
1595 purchase viagra online
1581 viagra prescription online
1481 womens viagra
1468 viagra uk
1426 viagra price
1257 viagra canada
1176 best price viagra
1171 buying viagra online
985 contact viagra
931 buy viagra cheap
859 cheap viagra online
824 viagra substitute
821 effects of viagra
780 buy viagra on line
742 cialis levitra viagra
742 viagra without prescription
740 cheap generic viagra
654 viagra card
638 viagra joke
632 lowest viagra price
617 viagra sales
584 viagra card.com
554 pfizer viagra
553 buying viagra
553 online pharmacy viagra
552 where to buy viagra
536 cialis vs viagra
522 buy generic viagra
518 viagra pharmacy
491 viagra dosage
486 levitra viagra
482 viagra drug
467 buy cheap viagra online
461 viagra risk
430 herbal alternative viagra
429 levitra viagra vs
429 mark martin viagra
426 buy generic viagra online
406 generic viagra online
404 viagra low cost
395 free trial viagra
375 kevin harvick viagra
372 cheapest viagra price
370 viagra tablet
363 picture of viagra
362 how to use viagra
353 viagra alcohol
346 order viagra prescription
344 wholesale viagra
337 cialis comparison levitra viagra
335 super viagra
328 natural viagra alternative
326 viagra story
325 viagra sales online
324 buy viagra in canada
324 cialis generic viagra
324 viagra soft tab
306 low price viagra
303 how does viagra work
299 viagra cost
299 get viagra
294 viagra mexico
293 mail order viagra
292 viagra com
290 viagra info
282 viagra best buy
274 viagra overnight
269 joe nemechek viagra
265 canada online pharmacy viagra
254 side affect of viagra
247 non prescription viagra
239 viagra online canada
229 sex and viagra
You want to remove all the numbers and I've a little trick for that.
Load Microsoft Excel and select and paste the above list into it. Now
you have two columns, one with numbers the other with just the text.
Select just the text and copy it to a text editor. Might work with
other spreadsheet programs. If not you'll have to manually remove the
numbers.
You now have this-
áviagra
áviagra online
áorder viagra
ágeneric viagra
ábuy viagra
áviagra for woman
ácheap viagra
ábuy viagra online
áviagra alternative
áherbal viagra
áfemale viagra
áfree viagra
áviagra prescription
áfree viagra sample
áviagra sample
áviagra on line
áviagra side effects
ádiscount viagra
ápurchase viagra
áorder viagra online
ánatural viagra
áviagra pill
áviagra sale
áviagra sale online
ácheapest viagra
áviagra information
áviagra cialis
ápurchase viagra online
áviagra prescription online
áwomens viagra
áviagra uk
áviagra price
áviagra canada
ábest price viagra
ábuying viagra online
ácontact viagra
ábuy viagra cheap
ácheap viagra online
áviagra substitute
áeffects of viagra
ábuy viagra on line
ácialis levitra viagra
áviagra without prescription
ácheap generic viagra
áviagra card
áviagra joke
álowest viagra price
áviagra sales
áviagra card.com
ápfizer viagra
ábuying viagra
áonline pharmacy viagra
áwhere to buy viagra
ácialis vs viagra
ábuy generic viagra
áviagra pharmacy
áviagra dosage
álevitra viagra
áviagra drug
ábuy cheap viagra online
áviagra risk
áherbal alternative viagra
álevitra viagra vs
ámark martin viagra
ábuy generic viagra online
ágeneric viagra online
áviagra low cost
áfree trial viagra
ákevin harvick viagra
ácheapest viagra price
áviagra tablet
ápicture of viagra
áhow to use viagra
áviagra alcohol
áorder viagra prescription
áwholesale viagra
ácialis comparison levitra viagra
ásuper viagra
ánatural viagra alternative
áviagra story
áviagra sales online
ábuy viagra in canada
ácialis generic viagra
áviagra soft tab
álow price viagra
áhow does viagra work
áviagra cost
áget viagra
áviagra mexico
ámail order viagra
áviagra com
áviagra info
áviagra best buy
áviagra overnight
ájoe nemechek viagra
ácanada online pharmacy viagra
áside affect of viagra
ánon prescription viagra
áviagra online canada
ásex and viagra
Save this as a html file (viagra.html) and load in Internet Explorer.
Select all and copy and past into a new text document and you have
this-
viagra viagra online order viagra generic viagra buy viagra
viagra for woman cheap viagra buy viagra online viagra alternative
herbal viagra female viagra free viagra viagra prescription free
viagra sample viagra sample viagra on line viagra side effects
discount viagra purchase viagra order viagra online natural viagra
viagra pill viagra sale viagra sale online cheapest viagra viagra
information viagra cialis purchase viagra online viagra
prescription online womens viagra viagra uk viagra price viagra
canada best price viagra buying viagra online contact viagra buy
viagra cheap cheap viagra online viagra substitute effects of
viagra buy viagra on line cialis levitra viagra viagra without
prescription cheap generic viagra viagra card viagra joke lowest
viagra price viagra sales viagra card.com pfizer viagra buying
viagra online pharmacy viagra where to buy viagra cialis vs viagra
buy generic viagra viagra pharmacy viagra dosage levitra viagra
viagra drug buy cheap viagra online viagra risk herbal alternative
viagra levitra viagra vs mark martin viagra buy generic viagra
online generic viagra online viagra low cost free trial viagra
kevin harvick viagra cheapest viagra price viagra tablet picture of
viagra how to use viagra viagra alcohol order viagra prescription
wholesale viagra cialis comparison levitra viagra super viagra
natural viagra alternative viagra story viagra sales online buy
viagra in canada cialis generic viagra viagra soft tab low price
viagra how does viagra work viagra cost get viagra viagra mexico
mail order viagra viagra com viagra info viagra best buy viagra
overnight joe nemechek viagra canada online pharmacy viagra side
affect of viagra non prescription viagra viagra online canada sex
and viagra
It's keywords are not spaced out very much so lets add a few filler
words. By luck we have some double spaces so useing find and replace
we replace all the double spaces with some filler text like " the best
ever " (note the extra spaces either side). now we have-
viagra the best ever viagra online the best ever order viagra the
best ever generic viagra the best ever buy viagra the best ever viagra
for woman the best ever cheap viagra the best ever buy viagra online
the best ever viagra alternative the best ever herbal viagra the best
ever female viagra the best ever free viagra the best ever viagra
prescription the best ever free viagra sample the best ever viagra
sample the best ever viagra on line the best ever viagra side effects
the best ever discount viagra the best ever purchase viagra the best
ever order viagra online the best ever natural viagra the best ever
viagra pill the best ever viagra sale the best ever viagra sale online
the best ever cheapest viagra the best ever viagra information the
best ever viagra cialis the best ever purchase viagra online the best
ever viagra prescription online the best ever womens viagra the best
ever viagra uk the best ever viagra price the best ever viagra canada
the best ever best price viagra the best ever buying viagra online the
best ever contact viagra the best ever buy viagra cheap the best ever
cheap viagra online the best ever viagra substitute the best ever
effects of viagra the best ever buy viagra on line the best ever
cialis levitra viagra the best ever viagra without prescription the
best ever cheap generic viagra the best ever viagra card the best ever
viagra joke the best ever lowest viagra price the best ever viagra
sales the best ever viagra card.com the best ever pfizer viagra the
best ever buying viagra the best ever online pharmacy viagra the best
ever where to buy viagra the best ever cialis vs viagra the best ever
buy generic viagra the best ever viagra pharmacy the best ever viagra
dosage the best ever levitra viagra the best ever viagra drug the best
ever buy cheap viagra online the best ever viagra risk the best ever
herbal alternative viagra the best ever levitra viagra vs the best
ever mark martin viagra the best ever buy generic viagra online the
best ever generic viagra online the best ever viagra low cost the best
ever free trial viagra the best ever kevin harvick viagra the best
ever cheapest viagra price the best ever viagra tablet the best ever
picture of viagra the best ever how to use viagra the best ever viagra
alcohol the best ever order viagra prescription the best ever
wholesale viagra the best ever cialis comparison levitra viagra the
best ever super viagra the best ever natural viagra alternative the
best ever viagra story the best ever viagra sales online the best ever
buy viagra in canada the best ever cialis generic viagra the best ever
viagra soft tab the best ever low price viagra the best ever how does
viagra work the best ever viagra cost the best ever get viagra the
best ever viagra mexico the best ever mail order viagra the best ever
viagra com the best ever viagra info the best ever viagra best buy the
best ever viagra overnight the best ever joe nemechek viagra the best
ever canada online pharmacy viagra the best ever side affect of viagra
the best ever non prescription viagra the best ever viagra online
canada the best ever sex and viagra
Still not ready, so we do one more replace, but this time semi
manually. Rather than using replace all we use the individual replace
and only replace some of the text. And we get something like this by
replacing some of the "the best ever" with "don't forget"-
viagra the best ever viagra online the best ever order viagra don't
forget generic viagra don't forget buy viagra the best ever viagra for
woman the best ever cheap viagra the best ever buy viagra online don't
forget viagra alternative the best ever herbal viagra don't forget
female viagra the best ever free viagra the best ever viagra
prescription don't forget free viagra sample don't forget viagra
sample the best ever viagra on line the best ever viagra side effects
don't forget discount viagra the best ever purchase viagra the best
ever order viagra online the best ever natural viagra don't forget
viagra pill the best ever viagra sale don't forget viagra sale online
the best ever cheapest viagra the best ever viagra information don't
forget viagra cialis the best ever purchase viagra online don't forget
viagra prescription online don't forget womens viagra the best ever
viagra uk the best ever viagra price the best ever viagra canada the
best ever best price viagra don't forget buying viagra online don't
forget contact viagra the best ever buy viagra cheap the best ever
cheap viagra online don't forget viagra substitute don't forget
effects of viagra the best ever buy viagra on line don't forget cialis
levitra viagra the best ever viagra without prescription the best ever
cheap generic viagra don't forget viagra card the best ever viagra
joke don't forget lowest viagra price don't forget viagra sales the
best ever viagra card.com the best ever pfizer viagra don't forget
buying viagra the best ever online pharmacy viagra the best ever where
to buy viagra don't forget cialis vs viagra the best ever buy generic
viagra the best ever viagra pharmacy don't forget viagra dosage the
best ever levitra viagra don't forget viagra drug the best ever buy
cheap viagra online the best ever viagra risk don't forget herbal
alternative viagra the best ever levitra viagra vs don't forget mark
martin viagra the best ever buy generic viagra online the best ever
generic viagra online don't forget viagra low cost don't forget free
trial viagra the best ever kevin harvick viagra the best ever cheapest
viagra price don't forget viagra tablet the best ever picture of
viagra don't forget how to use viagra don't forget viagra alcohol the
best ever order viagra prescription the best ever wholesale viagra
don't forget cialis comparison levitra viagra don't forget super
viagra the best ever natural viagra alternative the best ever viagra
story don't forget viagra sales online don't forget buy viagra in
canada the best ever cialis generic viagra the best ever viagra soft
tab the best ever low price viagra the best ever how does viagra work
don't forget viagra cost the best ever get viagra the best ever viagra
mexico don't forget mail order viagra don't forget viagra com don't
forget viagra info the best ever viagra best buy don't forget viagra
overnight the best ever joe nemechek viagra the best ever canada
online pharmacy viagra don't forget side affect of viagra the best
ever non prescription viagra the best ever viagra online canada don't
forget sex and viagra
We could repeat this, but you get the idea. Slap a <p> </p> around it
and a font tag to match the background colour and the text will be
invisible, but it will take up space on the page so put it at the very
bottom (no one will look there :-)).
There are techniques to fully hide this text from a viewer so the only
way to find it is view source, but I'm not going to give that info
here as I know one particular hidden text user who frequents this
group doesn't know more than the font colour technique!
Anyway, it's not poetry, but if you put a little more effort into it
within 15 minutes you can have some very keyword rich text to hide on
a page. There are also tools that can do an even better job including
cloaking. One I've tested will create an entire site of pages filled
with this crap then redirects to a page of your choice. All automatic
of course.
I don't use the above techniques since the risks are to great, I'm not
an ethical SEO, far from it as I've used link spamming in the past
when it was generally believed links to a site can't harm it unless
you reciprocate. But I don't use techniques that could result in a
ban/penalty.
To the OP: my second name is Law, would be funny if we were related
(not a widespread surname).
David
--
http://www.search-engine-optimization-services.co.uk/
Dan
techniques you mentioned. There is no way I would use these techniques on
any site that I valued but if I did this on a test domain, would the domain
get banned or the IP? Never messed around with banning and search engines
before.
--
Kind regards
Dan Pickard
-----------------------
http://hosting.fast-trak.net
http://www.design.fast-trak.net
http://www.training.fast-trak.net
"SEO Dave" <seo-d...@AMsearch-engine-optimization-services.co.uk> wrote in
message news:66ibj0djko6jvb3ik...@4ax.com...
Big Bill
You can have mine - I'm up to here with it!
BB
Stacey
"Big Bill" <kr...@cityscape.co.uk> wrote in message
news:ejqbj0tvvooap8d4c...@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 01 Sep 2004 13:04:52 GMT, SEO Dave
> <seo-d...@AMsearch-engine-optimization-services.co.uk> wrote:
>
<snip>
> >
> >Lets say I was interested in the keyword Viagra (which I'm not, I
> >flattly deny I've been searching for a source all day :-)).
>
> You can have mine - I'm up to here with it!
>
> BB
>
LOL Bill! I almost missed it though. I was skimming to fast and had to back
up!
Stacey
SEO Dave
You had to back up as you approached too fast!!
At least we all know why he's called Big Bill now.
LOL
David
--
http://www.search-engine-optimization-services.co.uk/
steve
words, if I took your technique and made the text visible it would be
legal? I know it wouldn't look pretty, but I had a friend who did just
that. He took a bunch of keywords, drew a horizontal rule at the end
of his regular content and stuck all these keywords beyond the HR. He
swore it helped, but I really didn't buy into it. Still, it does make
me wornder.
Steve
SEO Dave
>David, I never understood the signficance of hidden text. In other
>words, if I took your technique and made the text visible it would be
>legal?
I suppose it depends what the text is. If it was lists of keywords
with no real value and Google did a manual review of the page it might
get penalised. But if it's not too bad, just a bit on the spammy side
I doubt it would result in a penalty.
> I know it wouldn't look pretty, but I had a friend who did just
>that. He took a bunch of keywords, drew a horizontal rule at the end
>of his regular content and stuck all these keywords beyond the HR. He
>swore it helped, but I really didn't buy into it. Still, it does make
>me wornder.
It works, you can find plenty of examples that are explained by this
technique, but it really only works with easy SERPs. Thing is these
SERPs are so easy a single page with a single link to it and average
optimisation can take them anyway so why take such risks. Also it's
not that difficult with practice and experience to incorporate most
keywords into the content or somewhere in the code that counts without
ruining the content. The benefit of this is you tend only to include
relevant keywords, whilst with the example I posted you add a lot of
irrelevant ones.
The difference is those that use hidden text/big lists of keywords
don't have the skills required to do safe SEO. Also I look at it this
way, If I look at a page and say it doesn't deserve a particular SERP
for whatever reason I'm sure a Google employee who does manual reviews
will use similar criteria. The risks are small if done correctly, but
why take a risk you don't have to.
>Steve
David
--
http://www.search-engine-optimization-services.co.uk/
SEO Dave
<daniel.p...@SPAMfast-trak.netPlease> wrote:
>I would be interested to see how long it takes to get banned using the
>techniques you mentioned. There is no way I would use these techniques on
>any site that I valued but if I did this on a test domain, would the domain
>get banned or the IP? Never messed around with banning and search engines
>before.
I've not used hidden text or any other on page techniques that are
shady, but did use link spamming when I believed (like most) what you
did off site couldn't get your site banned (it was at the beginning of
my SEO experimentation).
There is no way to tell if your site will be one of the small number
that get hit with a penalty, but suspect the better you do more likely
you are to be penalised.
I did extremely well, within 9 months the site had gone from relying
on PPC to having over 5000 unique visitors a day and peaking at 7000
unique visitors a day at the time of the penalty. Had to buy a
dedicated server to cope with the traffic and it was no where near at
a stage where there was no traffic left to get from other phrases.
It wasn't all link spamming that made it successful since I uploaded a
mirror site that within 2 weeks was receiving over 1200 unique
visitors a day and within 6 weeks was at 2000+ a day (most from
Google). This mirror was right after the penalty (a replacement site)
and it's best links was just PR5 (from my NTL home page). So it's
success was on page mostly. It was also banned most likely because it
was a mirror site. Made the mistake of not excluding Google from the
original site with a robots.txt file.
Though with that sort of speed I could of kept uploading a new site
ever 2 months :-))
In my case the IP wasn't banned as I've used the IP for other things
with no problems. Though I wasn't a big link spammer, only did it for
one site and then not way over the top like a lot do (when you see a
list of 50 URLs on one post).
This was my main site for PR at the time and having it penalised wiped
me out for months. The site is still penalised, but Google is playing
silly buggers with it with one month showing backlinks and a little PR
then nothing. Still gets over 1000 unique visitors a day from other
engines, so still a going concern. I've added a few hundred links so
if Google ever remove the ban I'll know.
My advice would be to stay away from shady techniques unless you can
afford to loose the domain. It might also get your stuff looked at
more closely in the future by google if you have a penalised site. The
speed at which the mirror site was banned suggests they checked on
what I was doing for at least a few months (you can have mirror sites
up for 6 months without problems).
David
--
http://www.search-engine-optimization-services.co.uk/
stoma
<seo-d...@AMsearch-engine-optimization-services.co.uk> wrote:
>I've not used hidden text or any other on page techniques that are
>shady, but did use link spamming when I believed (like most) what you
>did off site couldn't get your site banned (it was at the beginning of
>my SEO experimentation).
You fibber David. You used hidden Divs on the site in your sig. The
really funny thing about that was that they showed up over your menu
in Opera so weren't strictly speaking 'hidden' after all.
http://www.search-engine-optimization-services.co.uk/
Gone now, wish I'd saved a screenshot.
-stoma
Stacey
"stoma" <st...@bee-tee-internet.com> wrote in message
news:l05dj05pnmmbks15a...@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 02 Sep 2004 02:47:13 GMT, SEO Dave
> <seo-d...@AMsearch-engine-optimization-services.co.uk> wrote:
>
> >I've not used hidden text or any other on page techniques that are
> >shady, but did use link spamming when I believed (like most) what you
> >did off site couldn't get your site banned (it was at the beginning of
> >my SEO experimentation).
>
> You fibber David. You used hidden Divs on the site in your sig. The
> really funny thing about that was that they showed up over your menu
> in Opera so weren't strictly speaking 'hidden' after all.
Ok, how is hidden divisions bad? It isn't text, but dividing up a page into
sections. You can have them and not get penalized for it. I don't get what
you are trying to get at. I don't see that Dave has changed anything. He
still has the page divided off into sections.
> Gone now, wish I'd saved a screenshot.
Well, it looks the same. I seen it months ago when it was new.
Stacey
--
Stacey's Simple Stuff
Rag Rugs - Home Decor Accessories- Crocheted Crafts
http://www.staceyssimplestuff.com
SEO Dave
<sta...@staceyssimplestuff.com> wrote:
>
>
>"stoma" <st...@bee-tee-internet.com> wrote in message
>news:l05dj05pnmmbks15a...@4ax.com...
>> On Thu, 02 Sep 2004 02:47:13 GMT, SEO Dave
>> <seo-d...@AMsearch-engine-optimization-services.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>> >I've not used hidden text or any other on page techniques that are
>> >shady, but did use link spamming when I believed (like most) what you
>> >did off site couldn't get your site banned (it was at the beginning of
>> >my SEO experimentation).
>>
>> You fibber David. You used hidden Divs on the site in your sig. The
>> really funny thing about that was that they showed up over your menu
>> in Opera so weren't strictly speaking 'hidden' after all.
>
>Ok, how is hidden divisions bad? It isn't text, but dividing up a page into
>sections. You can have them and not get penalized for it. I don't get what
>you are trying to get at. I don't see that Dave has changed anything. He
>still has the page divided off into sections.
Actually he is kind of right, I'm such a fibber :-)) I was testing out
some code that made text look hazy (gave it a shadow) and doubled up
your text using div layers and absolute positioning.
Calling them hidden though is a little exaggerated since it was
visible.
What you do is have two div layers with the same content and offset
one over the other. If you have different colour text on the two it
makes the text look a bit hazy (like an image).
Not exactly hidden, but could be easily abused if you didn't offset,
instead had the second div go exactly over the other.
Reading Stoma's post again I think he thinks them being visible was a
mistake :-)) No that was the whole point, it's a text effect.
After testing it I decided it was bordering on hidden, so removed it.
That's what I do, test things.
>> Gone now, wish I'd saved a screenshot.
>
>Well, it looks the same. I seen it months ago when it was new.
>
>Stacey
I've uploaded a page to here
http://www.search-engine-optimization-services.co.uk/css-tests/ for
you to see. The yellow shadow is the offset text.
Feel free to take a screen shot Stoma.
David
--
http://www.search-engine-optimization-services.co.uk/
Big Bill
<seo-d...@AMsearch-engine-optimization-services.co.uk> wrote:
>On Thu, 2 Sep 2004 00:02:50 -0400, "Stacey"
><sta...@staceyssimplestuff.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>"stoma" <st...@bee-tee-internet.com> wrote in message
>>news:l05dj05pnmmbks15a...@4ax.com...
>>> On Thu, 02 Sep 2004 02:47:13 GMT, SEO Dave
>>> <seo-d...@AMsearch-engine-optimization-services.co.uk> wrote:
>>>
>>> >I've not used hidden text or any other on page techniques that are
>>> >shady, but did use link spamming when I believed (like most) what you
>>> >did off site couldn't get your site banned (it was at the beginning of
>>> >my SEO experimentation.
>>>
>>> You fibber David. You used hidden Divs on the site in your sig. The
>>> really funny thing about that was that they showed up over your menu
>>> in Opera so weren't strictly speaking 'hidden' after all.
>>
>>Ok, how is hidden divisions bad? It isn't text, but dividing up a page into
>>sections. You can have them and not get penalized for it. I don't get what
>>you are trying to get at. I don't see that Dave has changed anything. He
>>still has the page divided off into sections.
>
>Actually he is kind of right, I'm such a fibber :-)) I was testing out
>some code that made text look hazy (gave it a shadow) and doubled up
>your text using div layers and absolute positioning.
>
>Calling them hidden though is a little exaggerated since it was
>visible.
>
>What you do is have two div layers with the same content and offset
>one over the other. If you have different colour text on the two it
>makes the text look a bit hazy (like an image).
I used to pay good money to see things like that.
BB
stoma
<sta...@staceyssimplestuff.com> wrote:
>Ok, how is hidden divisions bad? It isn't text, but dividing up a page into
>sections. You can have them and not get penalized for it. I don't get what
>you are trying to get at. I don't see that Dave has changed anything. He
>still has the page divided off into sections.
What he did was put a bunch of keywords in a <div> and tried to push
it off screen with {position:absolute; left:-600px}. A common
spammer's trick but one that doesn't work in Opera :-( Your pal
noticed this as well but didn't suss it out:
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=0703f09p1u23rncefu1vdm78h0t1ekupt2%404ax.com&output=gplain
-stoma
Stacey
"SEO Dave" <seo-d...@AMsearch-engine-optimization-services.co.uk> wrote in
message news:q17dj0dco959r6g2s...@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 2 Sep 2004 00:02:50 -0400, "Stacey"
> <sta...@staceyssimplestuff.com> wrote:
> Calling them hidden though is a little exaggerated since it was
> visible.
>
> What you do is have two div layers with the same content and offset
> one over the other. If you have different colour text on the two it
> makes the text look a bit hazy (like an image).
>
> Not exactly hidden, but could be easily abused if you didn't offset,
> instead had the second div go exactly over the other.
>
> Reading Stoma's post again I think he thinks them being visible was a
> mistake :-)) No that was the whole point, it's a text effect.
Ok, I see what it is. It is a drop shadow effect on the font. This effect
can be done other ways if you want a shadow effect. :-)
> After testing it I decided it was bordering on hidden, so removed it.
> That's what I do, test things.
I think it looks like I said a dropped shadow effect. It is used on graphics
and fonts all the time.
Stacey
Stacey
<snip>
> What he did was put a bunch of keywords in a <div> and tried to push
> it off screen with {position:absolute; left:-600px}. A common
> spammer's trick but one that doesn't work in Opera :-( Your pal
> noticed this as well but didn't suss it out:
As Dave pointed out, he was using a dropped shadow effect. It was visible. I
didn't see him trying to push it off side. It was directly in baack of the
links.
Oh, Carol is my pal now? Carol, put the pot on I will be right over! It
better not be unleaded! :-)
<snip>
Stacey
stoma
<seo-d...@AMsearch-engine-optimization-services.co.uk> wrote:
>Actually he is kind of right, I'm such a fibber :-)) I was testing out
>some code that made text look hazy (gave it a shadow) and doubled up
>your text using div layers and absolute positioning.
>
>Calling them hidden though is a little exaggerated since it was
>visible.
I'm not sure whether to believe you on this as the effect was so
hideous I can't imagine anyone doing it on purpose but if so it's a
highly ingenious spamming technique and I congratulate you on it Dave.
By the way I am now #1 for Classic Literature Centre and up to #16 for
Classic Literature. Plus I have five entries on page one of Google UK
- all above the Oxford University Press site! That means I am also
coming to get you!!!
-stoma
C.W.
I didn't 'suss it out' because, as my post shared, I didn't look at
the style sheet to see what the cause was - I posted, publically,
about me having a problem but only because [1] I thought the person
may be interested and [2] then again the person may not be interested
in how the site looked/performed outside of IE.
If this was alt.html or another NG then I may have looked a bit closer
at the style sheet back at that time *shrug* Dave also uses *ick* px
sized fonts *ick* and I don't share thoughts about that on this on
this group unless sizing of text discussions come up but in those I
share the cons about it. Dave may or may not care if I can easily read
his navigation/menu links or where ever else he wants to use px sized
text at either, you know. ;)
As far as the 'hidden text' itself goes I take it that you are
referring to the classes eff1 and eff2? I didn't look at his style
sheets back when I made that posting but I looked now.
Not new - I heard about this concept/idea in one of the other NG's a
while back as someone else tried using it on a site. Hold on a sec
and let me look it up ... ok, here's the thread:
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&threadm=Xns94A997517F73AlistserveNOSPAMhotma%40129.250.170.84&rnum=1&prev=/groups%3Fq%3Docrd.nsuok.edu/~maintesting/%2B%252Bcss%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26ie%3DUTF-8%26selm%3DXns94A997517F73AlistserveNOSPAMhotma%2540129.250.170.84%26rnum%3D1
He has since removed the testing page, or at least it didn't come up
for me when I tried, but I saved a copy of it back in March so here's
the technique he was inquiring about - if a couple of the responses
back didn't share a clue it was identical [only the person did a drop
shadow versus glow effect] to what Dave was using on his site:
<A style="COLOR: #445562">© 2004
<DIV class=logo style="COLOR: #40556f">Oklahoma
Center<BR>for<BR>Rural Development</DIV>
<DIV class=logo
style="LEFT: 2px; COLOR: #ccd0dd; POSITION: relative; TOP:
-89px">Oklahoma Center<BR>for<BR>Rural Development</DIV></A>
Have fun & cut and paste it then you should see that text will overlap
- as a drop shadow versus a glow like on Dave's site. I only copied
the bit from the html page where he applied the text appearance so
you may need to tweak one of the two lines since it may [or may not]
be a bit askew in positioning.
It is just a visual text effect without using an image so making the
page smaller in terms of items pulled in for use or using an IE
specific CSS touch [e.g. glow filter and colored scrollbars are IE
specific touches]. Nothing more - nothing less.
And yes, for the overlap it does require some use of negative
placement - as the above snippet from the person's sample page shared.
If I recall right - the Suckerfish menu is offset with negative
numbers yet is visible on the site. Although someone who just looked
and saw a negative number used for positioning may erroneously assume
either of two above was 'hidden text div to fool the search engines'.
The overlapped text technique didn't work on Dave's site in the links
area, and I haven't tinkered with it at all to see if it is due to the
image or the text underneath the "effect lines" that is throwing
placement askew in Opera - but it _is_ persnickety at times also
since it relies on strict positioning to get things to overlap.
It is also not very cross-browser compatible -- as the older thread I
shared a link to reveals and as you saw for yourself.
Carol
P. S. to Stacey: You gotta love it, huh?
C.W.
><A style="COLOR: #445562">© 2004
> <DIV class=logo style="COLOR: #40556f">Oklahoma
>Center<BR>for<BR>Rural Development</DIV>
> <DIV class=logo
> style="LEFT: 2px; COLOR: #ccd0dd; POSITION: relative; TOP:
>-89px">Oklahoma Center<BR>for<BR>Rural Development</DIV></A>
Actually - I tried the above just a few moments ago and it rendered
ickily. Try cut and pasting what is below instead as it lines up
better since the above was originally shared placed over an image at
the top of the page and I also missed copying the style used for the
logo class thoughts.
I tinkered with the placement/sizing of the font to do it's thing with
the image or or other content from the top of the page. As you may
notice, to pull off the visual the second div is sharing a negative
placement value "from the top of the page" to have it positioned OVER
OVER the first div when rendered.
<html>
<head>
<title>Untitled</title>
<STYLE>.logo {
FONT: 800 oblique small-caps 1.2em/1.3em sans-serif
}
</STYLE>
</head>
<body>
<DIV class=logo style="COLOR: #40556f">Test
text<BR>for<BR>playing around with</DIV>
<DIV class=logo style="LEFT: 2px; COLOR: #ccd0dd; POSITION:
relative; TOP:
-90px">Test text<BR>for<BR>playing around with</DIV>
</body>
</html>
Carol
stoma
>I didn't 'suss it out' because, as my post shared, I didn't look at
>the style sheet to see what the cause was - I posted, publically,
>about me having a problem
Why so touchy? Hmmm?
>but only because [1] I thought the person
>may be interested and [2] then again the person may not be interested
>in how the site looked/performed outside of IE.
Now that is where you really did make a mistake. Dave certainly was
not interested, did not bother thanking you for your post, and did not
fix his website for weeks, and only then because he thought although
it looked great it might get him a penalty in Google. Which it
wouldn't by the way, and wouldn't matter even if it did, as the site
is penalised already.
-stoma
<snip interesting spamming lesson>
SEO Dave
<st...@bee-tee-internet.com> wrote:
So now we resort to complete lies, what is it with you and Sam. Can't
win your argument or whatever with the truth so you resort to lies!
I do use absolute position, but as you well know I don't have a site
with {position:absolute; left:-600px} and never will (did test it two
years ago though).
Come on you can do better than throwing accusations around with no
proof.
BTW I know what all your sites are, never seen so many PR0 sites!
Would you like me to post them in another thread?
You are just another link spammer with banned sites, I now understand
why you like Sam so much, you even rely heavily on free sites like he
does. Though you seem to like the Wiki sandbox a lot, probably why you
are obsessed with all bans being the sandbox effect.
All because you spam the hell out of Wiki sandboxes doesn't make your
bans the sandbox effect.
David
--
http://www.search-engine-optimization-services.co.uk/
stoma
<seo-d...@AMsearch-engine-optimization-services.co.uk> wrote:
>So now we resort to complete lies, what is it with you and Sam. Can't
>win your argument or whatever with the truth so you resort to lies!
Shush, you are sounding like a hysterical girl David.
>I do use absolute position, but as you well know I don't have a site
>with {position:absolute; left:-600px} and never will (did test it two
>years ago though).
No, not lies David. As I suggested in another reply I may have been
mistaken about this as I was going from memory and may have jumped to
conclusions about what was in your style sheet. But the evidence is
gone now.
>BTW I know what all your sites are, never seen so many PR0 sites!
>Would you like me to post them in another thread?
Congratulations on the detective work, even though I did blatantly
give them away in a post yesterday. But if you'd dug a little deeper
you would have seen that my main (first ever) domain was only
registered on the 9th June - the last PR update being on the 23rd.
Check the google directory and you can see I got it to a PR6 in a
little over two months, with over 38,000 pages indexed. That's 5000
more than you managed in twice the time.
>You are just another link spammer with banned sites, I now understand
>why you like Sam so much, you even rely heavily on free sites like he
>does. Though you seem to like the Wiki sandbox a lot, probably why you
>are obsessed with all bans being the sandbox effect.
Unlike yours none of my sites are banned - check them in the index.
Now who were you calling a liar David?
>All because you spam the hell out of Wiki sandboxes doesn't make your
>bans the sandbox effect.
No, that didn't get them sandboxed (not banned, careful with those
lies Davey they could get you into trouble). Cross-linking did. Don't
believe me?
Right, how many spam links did you do for your latest hate blog? 0?
And how many cross-links from another blog? 100+?
What was the initial position in the serps for the ridiculously
uncompetitive term of abuse you optimised it for? #1?
Now what is its current ranking?
I don't know about you but I'm seeing it as having fallen to #43 of
just 327 results. A little surprising to say the least. What reason do
you think could possibly be behind that SEO 'dumbass' Dave?
-stoma
Big Bill
<st...@bee-tee-internet.com> wrote:
>On Fri, 03 Sep 2004 03:59:01 GMT, SEO Dave
><seo-d...@AMsearch-engine-optimization-services.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>So now we resort to complete lies, what is it with you and Sam. Can't
>>win your argument or whatever with the truth so you resort to lies!
>
>Shush, you are sounding like a hysterical girl David.
>
>>I do use absolute position, but as you well know I don't have a site
>>with {position:absolute; left:-600px} and never will (did test it two
>>years ago though).
>
>No, not lies David. As I suggested in another reply I may have been
>mistaken about this as I was going from memory and may have jumped to
>conclusions about what was in your style sheet. But the evidence is
>gone now.
Would it not be in the Wayback Machine?
BB
Stacey
> On Fri, 03 Sep 2004 03:59:01 GMT, SEO Dave
> <seo-d...@AMsearch-engine-optimization-services.co.uk> wrote:
>
> >So now we resort to complete lies, what is it with you and Sam. Can't
> >win your argument or whatever with the truth so you resort to lies!
>
> Shush, you are sounding like a hysterical girl David.
>
> >I do use absolute position, but as you well know I don't have a site
> >with {position:absolute; left:-600px} and never will (did test it two
> >years ago though).
>
> No, not lies David. As I suggested in another reply I may have been
> mistaken about this as I was going from memory and may have jumped to
> conclusions about what was in your style sheet. But the evidence is
> gone now.
You never said you may have been mistaken.
> >BTW I know what all your sites are, never seen so many PR0 sites!
> >Would you like me to post them in another thread?
>
> Congratulations on the detective work, even though I did blatantly
> give them away in a post yesterday. But if you'd dug a little deeper
> you would have seen that my main (first ever) domain was only
> registered on the 9th June - the last PR update being on the 23rd.
> Check the google directory and you can see I got it to a PR6 in a
> little over two months, with over 38,000 pages indexed. That's 5000
> more than you managed in twice the time.
That is true but the very last PR update was a couple of months ago along
with a directory update.
> >You are just another link spammer with banned sites, I now understand
> >why you like Sam so much, you even rely heavily on free sites like he
> >does. Though you seem to like the Wiki sandbox a lot, probably why you
> >are obsessed with all bans being the sandbox effect.
>
> Unlike yours none of my sites are banned - check them in the index.
> Now who were you calling a liar David?
I thought you had said you had a site sandboxed, anad then said you had 3
sandboxed.
> >All because you spam the hell out of Wiki sandboxes doesn't make your
> >bans the sandbox effect.
>
> No, that didn't get them sandboxed (not banned, careful with those
> lies Davey they could get you into trouble). Cross-linking did. Don't
> believe me?
Sandboxed or banned or penalized, yes or no? Why say that could get him into
touble with what he says? I just don't see why you have out to get Dave.
what has he done to you? You have been after him ever since you have started
posting, and I just don't get why.
Stacey
Stacey
<snip>
>>No, not lies David. As I suggested in another reply I may have been
> >mistaken about this as I was going from memory and may have jumped to
> >conclusions about what was in your style sheet. But the evidence is
> >gone now.
>
> Would it not be in the Wayback Machine?
>
> BB
>
Nope, not long enough. Has to be Waaayback. :-)
Stacey
stoma
<sta...@staceyssimplestuff.com> wrote:
>> No, not lies David. As I suggested in another reply I may have been
>> mistaken about this as I was going from memory and may have jumped to
>> conclusions about what was in your style sheet. But the evidence is
>> gone now.
>You never said you may have been mistaken.
This is what I said:
>I'm not sure whether to believe you on this as the effect was so
>hideous I can't imagine anyone doing it on purpose but if so it's a
>highly ingenious spamming technique and I congratulate you on it Dave.
>I thought you had said you had a site sandboxed, anad then said you had 3
>sandboxed.
I do. My TV site and two book sites are 'sandboxed' ie. are in the
index but won't be found for anything.
>Sandboxed or banned or penalized, yes or no? Why say that could get him into
>touble with what he says? I just don't see why you have out to get Dave.
>what has he done to you? You have been after him ever since you have started
>posting, and I just don't get why.
There is a huge difference between a ban and a sandbox. A banned site
is good for nothing, but a sandboxed site can still be used as normal
for passing PR and posting anchor text. It just will have almost no
traffic.
He certainly will get into trouble if he repeats lies about my sites
being 'banned' by google.
Dave has many ugly character traits, but the one that's the most
annoying is that he refuses to learn from anyone. He claims he will,
but he won't. He won't listen to me on linking and gets site after
site thrown into the sandbox as a result. That certainly deserves a
bit of teasing don't you think?
-stoma
Stacey
> On Fri, 3 Sep 2004 02:27:43 -0400, "Stacey"
> <sta...@staceyssimplestuff.com> wrote:
>
> >> No, not lies David. As I suggested in another reply I may have been
> >> mistaken about this as I was going from memory and may have jumped to
> >> conclusions about what was in your style sheet. But the evidence is
> >> gone now.
>
> >You never said you may have been mistaken.
>
> This is what I said:
>
> >I'm not sure whether to believe you on this as the effect was so
> >hideous I can't imagine anyone doing it on purpose but if so it's a
> >highly ingenious spamming technique and I congratulate you on it Dave.
>
And that does not say that you might have been mistaken. It states you don't
know whether to beleive him or not. Meaning you are basically and as you can
see calling him a spammer.
> >I thought you had said you had a site sandboxed, anad then said you had 3
> >sandboxed.
>
> I do. My TV site and two book sites are 'sandboxed' ie. are in the
> index but won't be found for anything.
>
> >Sandboxed or banned or penalized, yes or no? Why say that could get him
into
> >touble with what he says? I just don't see why you have out to get Dave.
> >what has he done to you? You have been after him ever since you have
started
> >posting, and I just don't get why.
>
> There is a huge difference between a ban and a sandbox. A banned site
> is good for nothing, but a sandboxed site can still be used as normal
> for passing PR and posting anchor text. It just will have almost no
> traffic.
Yes, there is. But getting ready to be banned and penalized will strip all
of your PR away. Unless there is a glitch, site down for some reason etc to
cause the no PR and removal. I can not see PR being passed for a penalized
site. It is either penalized or not. You can't have it some and then not.
> He certainly will get into trouble if he repeats lies about my sites
> being 'banned' by google.
Don't you talk about his sites even on other forums. Now he might be
mistaken as you were when you stated about his divs and such.
> Dave has many ugly character traits, but the one that's the most
> annoying is that he refuses to learn from anyone. He claims he will,
> but he won't. He won't listen to me on linking and gets site after
> site thrown into the sandbox as a result. That certainly deserves a
> bit of teasing don't you think?
No I don't. I haven't listened to you about stating his sites are sandboxed.
You can find his sites as you say above can not be found for anything. And
so, to me you are passing lies about him. You can find him in searches. And
I have seen him change his mind at times.....but you need some good proof.
Trust me his site isn't sandboxed. See your theory of sandbox isn't how the
majority feel the sandbox is.
And you state Dave has many ugly character traits, have you been listening
to Sam? From what I have seen Dave is one nice person who is very helpful to
people giving them good advice. He gets onto Sam and such because well how
Sam is, and how Sam treats him in this NG. So, really I can not see why you
have it after him so.
Stacey
SEO Dave
<sta...@staceyssimplestuff.com> wrote:
>Sandboxed or banned or penalized, yes or no? Why say that could get him into
>touble with what he says? I just don't see why you have out to get Dave.
>what has he done to you? You have been after him ever since you have started
>posting, and I just don't get why.
>
>Stacey
I wouldn't worry about it Stacey (I don't), I just seem to attract the
mentally unbalanced!
This is the main site I believe he's been talking about
http://tveasy.co.uk/
Looks like everything (or at least most) he has is on free sites aimed
at affiliate stuff.
Very low traffic site btw
http://extremetracking.com/open;unique?login=tveasy so not doing well
for the thousands of filler pages created.
Trying to work out where the feed for the above TV listings comes from
as I wouldn't mind one of them.
Looks like I might of caught him out on another lie (though not
confirmed it). Says the domain was registered June 9th, but the stats
page goes back to May 25th.
Not checked whois data, but what the hell if he can post
unsubstantiated claims about hidden text why shouldn't I do similar
:-))
This wouldn't be a deleted domain that you have registered Stoma,
interesting how it's in the last two Google directory updates?
David
--
http://www.search-engine-optimization-services.co.uk/
C.W.
<st...@bee-tee-internet.com> wrote:
>On Thu, 02 Sep 2004 09:22:56 GMT, C.W. <from...@nomail.com> wrote:
>
>>I didn't 'suss it out' because, as my post shared, I didn't look at
>>the style sheet to see what the cause was - I posted, publically,
>>about me having a problem
>
>Why so touchy? Hmmm?
>
>>but only because [1] I thought the person
>>may be interested and [2] then again the person may not be interested
>>in how the site looked/performed outside of IE.
>
>Now that is where you really did make a mistake.
Why? Because #2 was a possibility with the site owner?
> Dave certainly was not interested, did not bother thanking you for your post, and did not
>fix his website for weeks,
All the above were his choices - which would have #2, from above,
being right.
I didn't expect a "thank you" for sharing that [in Opera] that the
links didn't work right - whether it was Dave's site, or if it
happened to be one your sites, Jane Doe's, or John Smith's. As I
already said - some people just don't care about site appearances or
usability in other browsers; for all I know Dave could be one of them.
The text was visible on Dave's page - in IE [where the yellow was
visible and appeared as a 'glow'], Opera, and Firefox. Not "hidden"
nor positioned to appear off the page itself as you originally tried
to state.
"You fibber David. You used hidden Divs on the site in your sig. The
really funny thing about that was that they showed up over your menu
in Opera so weren't strictly speaking 'hidden' after all."
But then it is no longer decreed, after 4 or so posts on your side, by
you to now being "hidden text" or that the text was set to be "shown"
off the visible screen - just "spammy". Which is not the same as what
you originally tried to claim while calling Dave a liar either.
See what folks mean about jumping to assumptions? Less backpedaling
involved if one thinks before jumping to publically share assumptions.
If I hadn't shared with you how to do it, that others in the past also
played around with it, then you would still be wanting to doubt Dave
and add more posts from your side about it. However I think the 2
posts I shared, about the technique used and how to do it - with one
of those 2 being one to better share the HTML and CSS used for you to
play with - and this one is enough from my side on this particular
thought.
But, before I do close this post, about your recent response to
Stacey:
"Dave has many ugly character traits, but the one that's the most
annoying is that he refuses to learn from anyone. He claims he will,
but he won't. He won't listen to me on linking and gets site after
site thrown into the sandbox as a result. That certainly deserves a
bit of teasing don't you think?"
Thanks for the early morning chuckle ... this one is about as good as
your comments about Dave back in the middle of August: "Even if it
wasn't Dave that did it his ugly sneering attitude makes him equally
culpable. You're right Sam, whenever he can't win by the rules he
takes the coward's way out. Twice now I've argued him into the ground
and he's just slunk away from the thread without a reply. .... I
sometimes think he'd rather be right than have good Serps."
HAND
Carol
Big Bill
I was playing in there last night, I'd forgotten how interesting it
can be to look back on yourself. There's stuff I know I did in 96
though that's not indexed till 2001. Go look at www.kruse.co.uk in it
and look at the little dragon I nicked! I'd forgotten all about that.
BB
Jill
Don't worry about Stacey. She is constantly kissing ass and sticking
her nose into other people's business. She's like a puppy dog
following certain people around to make herself popular. It's
sickening. She has her defenders, but only a few. She was the same way
on the other forum if someone said something bad about Craig. Yet, if
Craig,. said something bad about another person she joined in. Again,
sticking her nose in where it wasn't wanted. She is a pure hypocrite
through and through. She does have a limited knowledge of SEO. She
could stick to that and keep her ass kissing opinions to herself. She
just doesn't realize how many here dislike her. After reading her
several ass kissing remarks, I decided to stick my fat ass in and say
something. But watch, she will act like she is the only one that has
the right to express her opinion or make remarks about another person.
In other words, when she does it, it's ok. When someone does it to
her, she thinks it isn't. Like I said, hypocrite.
Bottom line, every time someone says something bad about someone on
her sanctioned list, you can expect Stacey to stick her fat ass in
where it isn't wanted. Instead, she needs to concentrate on that dinky
web site of hers.
Stacey
"Jill" <stacey...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:3af846ff.04090...@posting.google.com...
> stoma <st...@bee-tee-internet.com> wrote in message
news:<ob5gj0hvmkeko20h4...@4ax.com>...
> > On Fri, 3 Sep 2004 02:27:43 -0400, "Stacey"
> > <sta...@staceyssimplestuff.com> wrote:
<snip>
> just doesn't realize how many here dislike her. After reading her
> several ass kissing remarks, I decided to stick my fat ass in and say
> something.
You need to get on a diet then with a fat ass.
>But watch, she will act like she is the only one that has
> the right to express her opinion or make remarks about another person.
> In other words, when she does it, it's ok. When someone does it to
> her, she thinks it isn't. Like I said, hypocrite.
I don't mind go ahead! LOL!!!
> Bottom line, every time someone says something bad about someone on
> her sanctioned list, you can expect Stacey to stick her fat ass in
I am trying to lose the weight trust me. But, my ass isn't that fat really.
:-)
> where it isn't wanted. Instead, she needs to concentrate on that dinky
> web site of hers.
Yep, it is dinky. Just the way I want it to be. Thanks!
And you right I never help people out when someone has been mean to them in
a wrong way. I suppose I was a different person writing these posts!
I honestly don't care who likes me who don't. I can join in any conversation
if I want, it is a NG. I will take up for anyone I *care* to. I just don't
take up for Sam.........he doesn't need it. :-) So go ahead and write what
you want. It isn't important what some people think, not everyone can like
me. You don't know me and I don't know you. I don't care.
Stacey
The poor dragon. I thought it was cool blowing the flames and such.
Stacey
SEO Dave
>Stoma
>
>Don't worry about Stacey. She is constantly
I wonder which one of the dynamic link SPAM duo made that post. Is it
Stoma talking to himself or Sam sticking up for his link spamming
buddy?
Who cares.
David
--
http://www.search-engine-optimization-services.co.uk/
stoma
<seo-d...@AMsearch-engine-optimization-services.co.uk> wrote:
>Very low traffic site btw
>http://extremetracking.com/open;unique?login=tveasy so not doing well
>for the thousands of filler pages created.
Not digging deep enough again are we Dave? That counter is just for
the home domain which as I've told you before is ranked appallingly in
Google (sandbox) and only shows up for the most obscure searches.
Check a sub:
http://extremetracking.com/open;unique?login=whathow
Kind of beautiful to look at (for me I mean, not you) with 4577
uniques yesterday. Adding in the other counters took the total above
5,000 a day for the first time yesterday, which was nice.
>Looks like I might of caught him out on another lie (though not
>confirmed it). Says the domain was registered June 9th, but the stats
>page goes back to May 25th.
It would only take a minute to check, but musn't let that get in the
way of a good smear campaign eh? The page was running on a freehost in
beta for a few weeks before the domain was registered.
>This wouldn't be a deleted domain that you have registered Stoma,
>interesting how it's in the last two Google directory updates?
Backing off from the 'banned sites' lie now David? Got to find another
one quick? Well no it wasn't actually. The advantages of a deleted
domain wouldn't have occurred to me at the time, though from studying
your blog-hijacking techniques I've learned a lot about how you get
your PR, but haven't done anything about imitating you yet.
-stoma
Stacey
"stoma" <st...@bee-tee-internet.com> wrote in message
news:4rlhj0pddc4ckufgi...@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 03 Sep 2004 07:50:11 GMT, SEO Dave
> <seo-d...@AMsearch-engine-optimization-services.co.uk> wrote:
>
> >Very low traffic site btw
> >http://extremetracking.com/open;unique?login=tveasy so not doing well
> >for the thousands of filler pages created.
>
> Not digging deep enough again are we Dave? That counter is just for
> the home domain which as I've told you before is ranked appallingly in
> Google (sandbox) and only shows up for the most obscure searches.
> Check a sub:
>
> http://extremetracking.com/open;unique?login=whathow
>
> Kind of beautiful to look at (for me I mean, not you) with 4577
> uniques yesterday. Adding in the other counters took the total above
> 5,000 a day for the first time yesterday, which was nice.
Yeah, it looks nice. But isn't that subdomain using a feed from the usenet?
So, actually you are getting the visitors like from usenet everywhere and
not necessarily going to your site.
> >Looks like I might of caught him out on another lie (though not
> >confirmed it). Says the domain was registered June 9th, but the stats
> >page goes back to May 25th.
>
> It would only take a minute to check, but musn't let that get in the
> way of a good smear campaign eh? The page was running on a freehost in
> beta for a few weeks before the domain was registered.
>
Registered and created are to different things.
Big Bill
<sta...@staceyssimplestuff.com> wrote:
The idea was, you load the page, the dragon flies across and blows
flame, then up come KIS in rainbow java. I could never sync it all up
though. Hey ho.
BB
Will Spencer
> I wonder which one of the dynamic link SPAM duo made that post. Is it
> Stoma talking to himself or Sam sticking up for his link spamming
> buddy?
>
> Who cares.
Do you really think they are two different people?
Stoma popped up and immediately began parroting Sam.
That would normally be incriminating, but more incriminating is that
dozens of obviously fake accounts did that in the months preceeding the
appearance of Stoma.
They would pop up, post a crap message or two, and disappear. The
fake posters were identificable not just by their domain name, but
also by their similar grammatical styles. It is quite difficult to
disguise that level of illiteracy.
The odds are good that our troll has simply grown a new arm.
The Stoma phenomena is different only in that Stoma is a more long-lived
apparition. Perhaps Sam became tired of creating so many new identities?
--
Will
Webmaster: http://www.internet-search-engines-faq.com
Will Spencer
<enormous pile of drivel deleted>
And look here... another crap post from another obviously fake identity.
Welcome to the newsgroup Jill/Chrissy/Sam/Bob/Stoma/. How is your job as
a janitor/model/call-center-worker/phone-sex-whore working out for you?
C.W.
<will.s...@internet-search-engines-faq.com> wrote:
>On Fri, 03 Sep 2004 18:26:08 +0000, SEO Dave wrote:
>
>> I wonder which one of the dynamic link SPAM duo made that post. Is it
>> Stoma talking to himself or Sam sticking up for his link spamming
>> buddy?
>>
>> Who cares.
>
>Do you really think they are two different people?
I don't think Sam is stoma and stoma is Sam just because they share an
obsession with Dave and the phrase "Classic Literature".
>Stoma popped up and immediately began parroting Sam.
Don't mean they are the same person though either - just that one of
them has a pet [a parrot].
[snip]
>The Stoma phenomena is different only in that Stoma is a more long-lived
>apparition. Perhaps Sam became tired of creating so many new identities?
Or did he just stumble across someone would just share his obsessions?
All I can say is that I bet the few folks that do type in the generic
phrase "Classic Literature" didn't know there was an SEO 'contest' for
their eyeballs by Sam or stoma. [Which oddly the pcpages "deleted"
that were created for that SERP do not appear but the pcpage deleted
for the phone sex SERP & used to link to Sam's classic lit sites came
up on Page 2 at the time he was going around claiming the shakespeare
one had been deleted]
Not that I think Dave is quaking in his boots. I bet stoma is using
their classic lit SERP sites to share links back to their other sites
[like they criticized Dave for doing when they went on and on about
Dave's lit site being sandboxed somehow].
Then again they are only creating the pages due to obsessing over Dave
[or wanting to be "just like Dave"?] and not much other reasoning on
their side why they created the site to begin with. If it was created
for other reasons then there would none of the tiresome "I'm comin'
after ya, Dave" type posts shared. *shrug* Then again - if they felt
Dave was 'unknowing' or 'sucked at' SEO then they wouldn't waste time
creating sites to 'compete against Dave' with.
But that's just my opinion.
Carol
stoma
<will.s...@internet-search-engines-faq.com> wrote:
>On Fri, 03 Sep 2004 18:26:08 +0000, SEO Dave wrote:
>
>> I wonder which one of the dynamic link SPAM duo made that post. Is it
>> Stoma talking to himself or Sam sticking up for his link spamming
>> buddy?
>>
>> Who cares.
>
>Do you really think they are two different people?
<snip more whinings emitted in high-pitched feminine voice>
One of the sure signs of impending breakdown is to imagine that
everything you disagree with is posted by the same person under
different names.
Try googling for 'cognitive dissonance' Willy boy, it might help you
with your obvious mental problem.
-stoma
Stacey
Stoma is probably an anagram of Thomas (the real surname). Which is better
than just choosing the addie Stoma(for those that know what a stoma is). And
Stoma uses way to much UK jargon to be from the states. So, this person is
from the UK just as the headers suggest and not using a proxy.
SEO Dave
<will.s...@internet-search-engines-faq.com> wrote:
>On Fri, 03 Sep 2004 18:26:08 +0000, SEO Dave wrote:
>
>> I wonder which one of the dynamic link SPAM duo made that post. Is it
>> Stoma talking to himself or Sam sticking up for his link spamming
>> buddy?
>>
>> Who cares.
>
>Do you really think they are two different people?
Absolutely sure they are two people.
Sam doesn't have clue about web design other than basic HTML. His only
marketable skill is he's good at manual link spamming. Like most
things now days links spamming can be automated and Sam clearly hasn't
mastered this.
He has a lot of PR6 sites yet doesn't make enough money from them to
give up his day job (it's embarrassing).
Stoma, he's got a much better understanding of web design. For example
he's mirroring NG posts on one of his sites. I assume this is
automated, something Sam wouldn't even attempt to do (for starters he
believes going over 100 pages a domain will get him banned).
Although I don't agree with Stoma's excessive sandboxing theory it at
least has some 'evidence' (wrongly interpreted IMHO) unlike Sam's
filler page (can't call it a theory as it's a joke!) which had no
evidence at all.
>Stoma popped up and immediately began parroting Sam.
I'd say if it wasn't for me those two would have nothing to do with
one another. No idea why Stoma has it in for me, but he does and as
they say my enemies enemy is my friend.
>That would normally be incriminating, but more incriminating is that
>dozens of obviously fake accounts did that in the months preceeding the
>appearance of Stoma.
>They would pop up, post a crap message or two, and disappear. The
>fake posters were identificable not just by their domain name, but
>also by their similar grammatical styles. It is quite difficult to
>disguise that level of illiteracy.
Quite funny when you read them. All of a sudden a new person enters
the NG and decides to have a go at one of the regulars with a hint of
sticking up for the little guy (Sam). No sooner have they made a post
and they are gone, never to be seen again :-))
Amazing how many of these use hotmail accounts as well.
>The odds are good that our troll has simply grown a new arm.
>
>The Stoma phenomena is different only in that Stoma is a more long-lived
>apparition. Perhaps Sam became tired of creating so many new identities?
LOL. Think Sam's found a kindred spirit, both like to post links to
their sites on guestbooks. Marriages have lasted decades with the
couple having less in common :-))
If one of them looses interest in me they'll quickly have nothing to
talk about. I can see it now, one emails the other. "Look at the
Classic Literature SERP, I've moved from18 to 16 today with only
having to add 10 PR7 spammed links. Dave's in for it next week when
I'm sure to take number one with the new places I've found to spam."
ROFLOL
Speaking of which Sam said my site would on page 4 of the classic
literature SERP by now. What a surprise my sites still in the top 10
where it's been since they started their self proclaimed Classic
Literature SERP competitions to beat my literature site at that one
SERP.
You know what the funny thing is, that SERP is very low traffic. Only
160ish people search for it a day over the entire planet! So I don't
care if I'm 1st, 21st or not in the top 1 million.
David
--
http://www.search-engine-optimization-services.co.uk/
C.W.
<seo-d...@AMsearch-engine-optimization-services.co.uk> wrote:
>Amazing how many of these use hotmail accounts as well.
Or yahoo.com ones.
>You know what the funny thing is, that SERP is very low traffic. Only
>160ish people search for it a day over the entire planet!
All they care about is that they noticed you have a site landing in
the Top 10 for that phrase. You could had "peanut butter & jelly
sandwiches" as the site title and landing on Page 1 for that phrase -
and I bet you 2 Krispy Kreme doughnuts Sam and stoma would have spent
time posting about them creating sites to target 'peanut butter &
jelly sandwiches' as a SERP so "comin' to get you".
Even though they wanna try to badmouth ya in front of others; deep
down inside they wanna be just like you, Dave! ;)
Carol
SEO Dave
>Even though they wanna try to badmouth ya in front of others; deep
>down inside they wanna be just like you, Dave! ;)
I suppose I should take it as a compliment then. A "well done Dave"
would be preferable though :-))
I feel like Mogli from The Jungle Book with the Orangutans wanting to
be like me.
LOL
David
--
http://www.search-engine-optimization-services.co.uk/
Big Bill
<seo-d...@AMsearch-engine-optimization-services.co.uk> wrote:
>On Sun, 05 Sep 2004 04:53:59 GMT, C.W. <from...@nomail.com> wrote:
>
>>Even though they wanna try to badmouth ya in front of others; deep
>>down inside they wanna be just like you, Dave! ;)
>
>I suppose I should take it as a compliment then. A "well done Dave"
>would be preferable though :-))
>
>I feel like Mogli from The Jungle Book with the Orangutans wanting to
>be like me.
>
>LOL
>
>David
I wanna be like you-oo-oo!
BalouBB
stoma
<seo-d...@AMsearch-engine-optimization-services.co.uk> wrote:
>I feel like Mogli from The Jungle Book with the Orangutans wanting to
>be like me.
Just to be more like you Dave, I now have a site in my sig that can't
be found in the top 500 for "search engine optimization services".
Hope you don't think I cheated ;-)
-stoma
SEO Dave
wrote:
>>I feel like Mogli from The Jungle Book with the Orangutans wanting to
>>be like me.
>>
>>LOL
>>
>>David
>
>I wanna be like you-oo-oo!
>
>BalouBB
Nooooooooo, not another one :-))
David
--
http://www.search-engine-optimization-services.co.uk/
prosc...@gmail.com
> Looking to promote my site. Any ideas who is best perhaps a link to there
> website please.
Hello the best one is you ?
I have always asked a question to myself about SEO and paying for links from directories. Do they work? Maybe or maybe not. Let me share my experience. Every week i get calls from directory services offering me top google listings and yahoo for my site. http://www.proscreens.net informing me that i can become top of major search engines and achieve lots and lots of traffic. This maybe so but there is something to consider. When i get a call from these directories the first thing they do is ask me to log on to their site therefore gaining a hit. Then they ask me to search for something random like hairdressers or plumbers say for example in Ascot. In doing this their gaining a hit for the company that has paid to be on that directory and top of the listing. These people can be very persistant trying to extract £300- £500 for a listing. Also as a small business i also like others maybe look at directories to see what the opposition are doing so once again gaining more hits for their website but not necessarily looking for a service. I find the best way to gain more hits in business is to offer a good service and meet friends on the way. Us at http://www.proscreens.net would rather not spend the money on this kind of advertising and give something back to the community. ie for us, we do free film screenings for charities. Also we ask other business to link swap with us when we see their work, ie, when we are on a job and there is a company that also does a good job. I would very much like to know other peoples opinion to this.
pradeep...@gmail.com
My website keyword position is remove .What is the problem ???
Suggestion are accepted...
jimmy lalani
> Looking to promote my site. Any ideas who is best perhaps a link to there
> website please.
check our website
www.ebizsubmit.com
Ebizsubmit is an advance Internet Marketing and Web Promotion company based in Canada. Since its inception in 2002, it has served companies in North America, Europe, Australia, Asia and Middle East. Dedicated to provide best ecommerce solution to all sizes of business Ebizsubmit succeed reaching the regional and international markets by showcasing their state-of-the-art services & Solutions; bringing highest numbers of impression, clicks and conversion.
cheers!
jimmy lalani
abdallahe...@gmail.com
all4you...@gmail.com
> Looking to promote my site. Any ideas who is best perhaps a link to there
> website please.