Thread: Top Ten SEO's
View Single Post
Old 01-12-2007, 01:05 AM   #1 (permalink)
John Scott
Individualist
 
John Scott's Avatar
 
Join Date: 09-27-03
Location: Japan, mostly
Posts: 27,027
iTrader: 3 / 100%
John Scott is supreme webmaster materialJohn Scott is supreme webmaster materialJohn Scott is supreme webmaster materialJohn Scott is supreme webmaster materialJohn Scott is supreme webmaster materialJohn Scott is supreme webmaster materialJohn Scott is supreme webmaster materialJohn Scott is supreme webmaster materialJohn Scott is supreme webmaster materialJohn Scott is supreme webmaster materialJohn Scott is supreme webmaster material
Send a message via AIM to John Scott Send a message via Yahoo to John Scott
Top Ten SEO's

There are a few "top ten SEO" lists floating around the blogospere.

For example, this one from SEOMOZ:

# Danny Sullivan
Audience Size: 8/10 (used to be even higher at SEW, and probably will again soon - this also includes the entire SES conference audience and surrounding media)
Decision Makers: 10/10
Credibility: 10/10

# Michael Arrington
Audience Size: 10/10
Decision Makers: 9/10
Credibility: 7/10 (while Techcrunch matters, it doesn't have the same level of impact that Danny does with the search industry specifically)

# Matt Cutts
Audience Size: 7/10
Decision Makers: 9/10
Credibility: 8/10

# John Battelle
Audience Size: 7/10
Decision Makers: 8/10
Credibility: 8/10

# Brett Tabke
Audience Size: 8/10
Decision Makers: 7/10
Credibility: 8/10 (the only reason I'd put him behind John is because he contributes so infrequently to the search world's dialogue)

# Tim Mayer
Audience Size: 4/10
Decision Makers: 8/10
Credibility: 7/10

# Barry Schwartz
Audience Size: 7/10
Decision Makers: 7/10
Credibility: 7/10

# Shawn Hogan
Audience Size: 8/10 (all of Digitalpoint is included here)
Decision Makers: 4/10
Credibility: 5/10

# Philipp Lenssen
Audience Size: 6/10
Decision Makers: 6/10
Credibility: 6/10

# Jeremy Schoemaker
Audience Size: 7/10
Decision Makers: 6/10
Credibility: 5/10

I think, before you put up a list, you have to decide on a criteria.

What is the criteria? Who posts the most? I know of some folks who post more several articles a day, who have zero credibility, zero influence. Like the WepProNews paid writers. I was talking to a friend a few months ago about paid writing, and WepProNews came up as an example of how not to do it. Sure, those people write a lot, but they do not provide any insights.

I think insight is the most important. SEO Blogger "X" can post three blog posts a day about the drinks they had at Pubcon, about the yellow shoes that Randfish wears and about the blogger who cited an article without linking to it (evil!), and does that really provide any value SEO-wise?

Blogger "Z" posts once a week, revealing results of SEO tests, sources for quality linkage, and using a blog to generate links.

Which blog would you rather read?
__________________
Individualism .::. My Facebook - Add Me
John Scott is offline   Reply With Quote