The problem is in the "worse" statement. I agree except for that part. Google won't treat you worse for using the Add URL on G, however it will treat you "better" if it finds you on a site that has good PR. There is no penalty, no "worst", just less starting momentum. A link from a valid site gets you from 0-60 in seconds. A link just submitted to the form is like going 10mph. Submit to the form, then get a link from a good PR site the next week and you'll be at 60mph. How does that sound?
Danny, this was not towards you or about you. It was responding to those who gave me the "but then I could penalize my competitor's sites". You have some good points Danny, but you ramble way too much. I lose interest when 80% of content are hot air and full of self promotion but apparrently you have a good crowd of participants already
btw the article http://www.seochat.com/c/a/Link-Tra...-Google-part-2/ has 2 stars out of 5 ... just fyi, and that is very low for seochat standards even. Danny, I would seriously recommend you taking a couple of marketing classes in order to learn how to communicate a little bit better. You have a few good points but most of the content of your posts gets and will get ignored.
geesh I just saw this. I believe truly in not letting Google find you guys thru a submit but Danny ... ummm lmao, sorry but seochat must be getting desperate for articles now. this has been written a million times in the past 4 years. You may want to hurry up and get a patent for your brandnew discovery.
once again, take a class on marketing or stay away from subjects you do not fully understand. This statement is so simple but completely wrong as well. Please stop encouraging people to get listed quickly. You will cause a lot of damage to people taking your advice. Anyways, I am done. Don't have time to read every single nonsense self proclaimed experts convince high profile sites to post. Your article has 5% worthy of reading, the rest is just providing seochat.com with some cheap keyword rich content which seems to be what they are looking for in the first place.
Sitetutor and all - Stick to the SEOChat Forums - http://forums.seochat.com - there's a wonderfully well-informed community there.
An excellent lesson in faulty logic. First, the premise is wrong, or at least incomplete. It's not that it's better per se for Google to find through a link from another site -- it doesn't actually matter at all how Google finds your site. It's that IF Google finds you from another link, it means that you have at least one link to your site -- if you are submitting the site manually, that may or may not be true. Second, A -> B does NOT necessarily imply that B -> A. You need to re-read your text on basic logic. IF a given site has, say, three PR4 links pointing to it, it does not matter one iota wheher the site is submitted manually or you wait for Googlebot to find you. You will be in exactly the same position either way. This is not at all what you said in the article or earlier in this thread. By implication, you are admitting your earlier statements were wrong, or at least far too broad, in which case at best they were misleading. Just say that and move on.
Hmmmmmmmmmm.... Looks like I might've come in at the end of this thing but in my personal experience a DMOZ listing meant everything at the beginning and now means substantially less to me. When I began composing my first cyber-retail store I called on an "SEO expert" to help me generate traffic. What made me decide to go with him was his comment about "hand written submissions" to DMOZ. I gave him a description and keywords and what I eventually saw in the DMOZ directory was way whacked down to about a sentence. I'm not sure if it was the directory editors or my SEO that super-modified my text and even though I was not very happy with the content I got listed in the directory within 30-days. No sandbox effect for what it's worth... After that I noticed Google indexing my site and then some links and that was a little over a year ago. There's been about 80 indexed backlinks in Google to date and they are far more embellished than the original DMOZ listing. DMOZ has never updated my listings even though I resubmitted content within weeks of the original listings. I've heard so many sad stories about webmasters waiting for any kind of response to their submissions. Weeks... Months... Years...? How long has anyone here had to wait for a listing..? Who knows maybe the one sentence submission got listed quickly because it was so modest and mine was so descriptive it might've never gotten listed... Sooo... to some up... I thought my DMOZ listing sucked... but I got listed... I got indexed... I get traffic... and I've forgotten about DMOZ... I'm Happy..!
michael - did you post that in the right thread? ... when did dmoz come into play here? we're talking about the 'add url' button being bad for your site.
Geeze... I thought he was starting to back down and then I read on and find he's back to square one... unbelievably thick. I grasped it the first time, Danny boy... for your edification, I have bolded the part of the bit you quoted that you apparently didn't read. But you're still wrong. Yes! You're finally starting to get it, Danny! Hallelujah!! Only if you add this: "you will get a better ranking for your site than if you submit your site using the Add URL feature and Google spiders and indexes you that way and you have zero backlinks to the site" Otherwise, it is still false. No. See above. A clear violation of the fundamental principles of Logic 101. You really need to go back and re-take that course, danny. How about ALL of it? Because without the better starting PR part you have no argument whatsoever. And is STILL has NOTHING to do with manual submission. No. That is incorrect. Wrong. Misleading. False. A blatant mistatement of the facts. Period.
i agree minstrel but there are no facts. i have a major problem with the entire community saying "these are the facts." it's not like buying a book on IIS from MS and having them school you ... those are the facts. the se's don't tell us how to do squat ... if you are talking SEO, every word out of your mouth is an opinion and i don't care how long you have been doing it or how well you do it. my words are opinions as are everyone elses. there are those that know better than others .... but still. if the experts would all just admit they are speculating based on their experience, i wouldn't have issues when they come up with things i don't agree ... even when i strongly disagree. call me anal ... jsut a pet peeve of mine i guess.
hehe ... no comment. But we don't all come into forums and defend them, we pretend we didn't write them or had no idea they were placed on our sites, right?
Eh, if there were no arguments forums would be useless. We'd all sit around agreeing with everyone. Like it or not, we as humans enjoy bickering, arguing, talking behind peoples backs. We're evil
Minstrel/ Dr Baxter. I think your posts regarding Danny Wall is making you look like a school yard bully. A lot of this is Spec in the SE biz. The trouble I am having with your posts is you are way too argumentative, nit picking on symantics. Sometimes we post late at night, like I am now, and I am afraid you will over anaylyze my spelling <---- and flame me for coming off inept as a human being because I could not spell "analyze" previously. What confuses me about your postings here is your own website states: PsychLinks is created and maintained by Dr. David J. Baxter, a clinical psychologist in Ottawa, Ontario, Canada. This web site consists of a database of selected psychology, psychiatry, mental health, and self-help resources, with links to information on the internet, in books, or by telephone regarding mental illness, medication issues, and psychological assessment, counseling, and psychotherapy for individuals (including adults, adolescents, and children), couples, families, and mental health professionals. Are you an SEO expert? Enthusiast? Or do you make your living as a clinical psychologist? If it is the latter, I should dare say you must posess extraordinary patience (not patients) to be successful in what you do. I just don't see it in your posts to Danny Wall. You're way to avaricious in making your point (s). It is my opinion that a site that is already spidered by Google will NOT be penalized for multiple submissions via the Google add url form. It is my women's intuition Dr, that a new site will prosper much better by avoiding the add url form via Google and to link your new site off a ranked/bls site and let the bot come find you. I look forward to your forthcoming flame in the morning that will make for good fodder over my morning coffee, and as good as it will be, I have no interest in trying to top your carefully handcrafted, over analytical, didactic verbose. Chide me, laud me, you'll make my day either way. Bri <smooch>
I'm not going to flame you, Brianna. I'm not going to even disagree with you. But then you are not pretending to be an SEO expert and trying to claim that Google will penalize you for manual site submissions. As for my profession, I don't see what that has to do with anything -- I'm not Dr. Baxter here, I'm just minstrel, another member. I'm not even claiming to be an SEO expert. But i do know nonsense and BS when I see it. And if you think my replies to Danny Wall are harsh, you might take another look at his to me and others in this thread. He's hardly an innocent bystander.
Ministrel made one big mistake. He read thru the whole posts of Danny's. Must be irritating. When I read something and have the same thing repeated to me 3 times and "Now we have learned ... " attached to it, then I stop taking the poster serious. What Danny has repeated again and again is something he calls his invention when in reality many knew but didn't want to share with just anyone. I believe submitting before being indexed hurts. But not based on Danny's article. It would have made absolutely no sense to me hadn't I known what I know. I honestly think that articles like his should appear anywhere since they are more of a waste reading thru and anybody with an open mind or a life will not be able to suffer thru this kind of stuff. I would rather go on the resource zone and read every single "submission status request " thread since 1999