Why SEOmoz Needs A “For Entertainment Purposes Only” Disclaimer

peter_d · 09-23-2007, 04:47 PM

Amusing. Seems Rand put the cat amongst the pigeons when he needlessly slagged off directories.

Article provides back-sp(h)in....

http://smackdown.blogsblogsblogs.com...ly-disclaimer/

Quote:

It seems that a bit of what Rand is trying to say is that people who actively promote their directories are inherently going to be building poor ones. Maybe it’s just me, but I don’t know of any paid directories that are worth anything that haven’t been promoted at one time or another, and Rand doesn’t bother to offer any examples that would show otherwise. Rand does in fact indicate that what he is doing is guesswork, but it is with a single word that most will miss near the top of his post. He states that the post is in fact about “why Google might take this move”, and the use of the word “might” instead of “did” of course clears it up for me

**John Scott** · 09-23-2007, 09:31 PM

Interesting debates surrounding this topic. Wish I had more time to read them all.

mvandemar · 09-23-2007, 11:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by John Scott

Interesting debates surrounding this topic. Wish I had more time to read them all.

Oh, no excuses young man, you make the time! Or... or... or...

Well, hell, I have no backup for that one.

I'm glad some did at least liked the article, I am getting a bit of flak for it.

-Michael

Red_Virus · 09-24-2007, 12:27 AM

I agree that Rand was slightly wrong when he was referring to General Directories