Re: will this consider as spamming / cloaking?
- From: The Gobbling Goblin <customerservices@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 27 Oct 2007 18:52:34 +0100
On Sat, 27 Oct 2007 17:14:58 -0000, ultrakit <ultrakit@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
I totally agree on the "make site for user not for search engine".
And what does user want?
I've finally convinced my client to have the 1 line descriptions for
each page ALL displaying. We all want to know what we will be getting
right from step 1 right? This gotta be the solution that makes
everyone happy.
And while you are at it, convince him NOT to have a splash screen.
So 1984 / waste of time / totally pointless to everyone / wastes b/w /
user has to click more times / drives people away / etc etc
----== 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 =----
.
- References:
- will this consider as spamming / cloaking?
- From: ultrakit
- Re: will this consider as spamming / cloaking?
- From: Tonnie Lubbers
- Re: will this consider as spamming / cloaking?
- From: T.J.
- Re: will this consider as spamming / cloaking?
- From: Tonnie Lubbers
- Re: will this consider as spamming / cloaking?
- From: T.J.
- Re: will this consider as spamming / cloaking?
- From: Tonnie Lubbers
- Re: will this consider as spamming / cloaking?
- From: T.J.
- Re: will this consider as spamming / cloaking?
- From: Tonnie Lubbers
- Re: will this consider as spamming / cloaking?
- From: ultrakit
- will this consider as spamming / cloaking?
- Prev by Date: Re: Google has updated PR
- Next by Date: Re: Suggestions please
- Previous by thread: Re: will this consider as spamming / cloaking?
- Next by thread: PR update
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|