Inverview with an Ex Googler

[blackhatq]

This looks really interesting, I just saw it on searchengineland

http://searchengineland.com/ex-googler-to-please-google-with-your-seo-forget-about-seo-136800

 

[drywallrob]

I wish he gave up more info. I did like the fact that he says that the update was much larger than what everyone had anticipated (penquin). I like how Google downplays the "impact" with a percentage that is not accurate.

 

[Nauthiz666]

I liked what he said for the most part aside the "no seo is the best seo" shit.

 

[crazyz]

I liked what he said for the most part aside the "no seo is the best seo" shit.

I think he is referring to "SEO" in the conventional sense, not the sort of "rip and run" SEO practiced in this fine forum

 

[blackhatq]

I wish he gave up more info. I did like the fact that he says that the update was much larger than what everyone had anticipated (penquin). I like how Google downplays the "impact" with a percentage that is not accurate.

The update definitely affected more than 3% of websites

I liked what he said for the most part aside the "no seo is the best seo" shit.

I think the "no seo is the best seo" was a spin put on the article by the journalists to get more traffic..

I think he is referring to "SEO" in the conventional sense, not the sort of "rip and run" SEO practiced in this fine forum

He is referring to the spammy SEO that is done alot eg Xrummer blasts.. SEO that appears more natural will never go out of style

 

[maxxwilliams]

So just make 100s of websites in web 2.0 properties, build them so they look relevant to your site, add content related to your money site's content, and link responsibly... (1/2 keyword link, and then 1/2 "Visit official page..." type of links.) -- That's what I got from this anyway...

 

[LakeForest]

I wish he gave up more info. I did like the fact that he says that the update was much larger than what everyone had anticipated (penquin). I like how Google downplays the "impact" with a percentage that is not accurate.

See, that scares me.

It means either their algorithm was so bad it shot down random sites (which it did), or they didn't anticipate so many sites were using terrible SEO (which they are) and this will end up causing more aggressive, similar updates in order to obliterate the sites with bad SEO and then slowly allow the sites who were incorrectly targeted to climb back.

Everything about this shows what a huge mistake Penguin was. Panda was a nuisance while Penguin was supposed to be the beginning of a new wave of moderating SEO and it ended up showing everyone how nigh impossible it is to stop SEO.

 

[lykathe]

Lame. I feel like the top 5 SEO companies get large checks from Google to post crap like this. And at the end where Google had "no comment" like they just got "uber pwned" by this generic ass info, only makes me think it harder. "Weyher explains that each person on the search quality team covers a certain "market" or "specialization." His was content quality and backlink profiles. Below, some of the quotes that I found most interesting from the interview along with a comment or two from me in italics where appropriate." Sounds like bullshit so hard.. how is quality content and backlink profiles a "specialty niche"? Those are literally like atleast 50-60% of how you would break down SEO. I could extrapolate like atleast 10 catgeorie from delving deeper into those categories. Bottom line on SEO, unless you're testing 10-25 sites a week with different methodology a week, why believe cra[ like this (lame, vague and generic rehashed garbage) when you could just see the truth for yourself and make a fortune from your results?

 

[partymarty4870]

it read just like the standard google line to me - nothing too groundbreaking.

Maybe he was a toilet cleaner at google and not actually employed in search, that explains the linked in profile.

 

[BlackhatArticles.com]

The article looks more like convincing blackhatters to do better on-page seo and stop spamming.

 

[danailo]

5 minutes of my life I'll never get back. Searchengineland.com is posting a lot of filler content lately.

 

[BlueTurtle]

I'm not an SEO, but this looks like a load of crock to me.

"no seo is the best seo" -- Utter garbage. Google is a computer running an algorithm.

If no seo was the best then that means that everyone with their own blog and home-written good useful content is going to rank, but they can't all rank.

The only way "no seo is the best seo" will be true is when Google hire a trillion workers to manually review all sites or we get AI able to match minimum wage workers and assess quality independent of factors like backlinks/keywords etc.

As long as there is an ALGORITHM, then there will be the ability to increase your rankings through manipulation.


Besides, do you guys really think an ex employee would be allowed to disclose any information Google didn't want out there? You don't think the search time sign an NDA?

Google would legally crush anyone who tried to share any real information about the algorithm. From a career perspective it would also be suicide. No big company wants someone who'll divulge company secrets on a blog.


In my opinion Google are doing this as part of a campaign to convince people that the days of SEO are over and they should focus on quality. It's misdirection.

The more people they can convince that "no seo is the best seo" the easier it'll be for them. If no one SEO'd then the search results would actually be amazing and highly relevant. Ie, if all backlinks etc were natural. Backlinks in theory are a near perfect form of determining the quality of a site, the problem is they can be manipulated.

 

[noman s]

"...what I tend to tell people is the following; if you want to please Google with your SEO, then forget about SEO."

Exactly!

 

[john1444]

This reconfirm the anchor text variation thing is true.

Not just variation but having more of your URL and brand name/URL name.

 

[collywobbles99]

Thanks, shame he just teases out enough information to get you interested...

 

[psytrance]

Tip 1: Want to rank your site front page?

- PAY

 

[Catt Mutts]

Brainwashing...

 

[bmatthews]

Its a real shame many people on here don't seem to be intelligent enough to grasp the meaning of the phrase, "no seo is the best seo"....

It is obviously true, all you need to do to never have to worry about Google's next algorithmic update, penalty or anything, is to simply forget about SEO and create a site that provides a valuable service or purpose in people's lives. Once you tackle that problem, your site will rank for whatever it is supposed to rank for. That is all he meant. If you worry less about building backlinks and focus more on creating a service that people wanted to link to, you would never have to worry about SEO.

 

[manny521]

I'm not an SEO, but this looks like a load of crock to me.

"no seo is the best seo" -- Utter garbage. Google is a computer running an algorithm.

If no seo was the best then that means that everyone with their own blog and home-written good useful content is going to rank, but they can't all rank.

The only way "no seo is the best seo" will be true is when Google hire a trillion workers to manually review all sites or we get AI able to match minimum wage workers and assess quality independent of factors like backlinks/keywords etc.

As long as there is an ALGORITHM, then there will be the ability to increase your rankings through manipulation.


Besides, do you guys really think an ex employee would be allowed to disclose any information Google didn't want out there? You don't think the search time sign an NDA?

Google would legally crush anyone who tried to share any real information about the algorithm. From a career perspective it would also be suicide. No big company wants someone who'll divulge company secrets on a blog.


In my opinion Google are doing this as part of a campaign to convince people that the days of SEO are over and they should focus on quality. It's misdirection.

The more people they can convince that "no seo is the best seo" the easier it'll be for them. If no one SEO'd then the search results would actually be amazing and highly relevant. Ie, if all backlinks etc were natural. Backlinks in theory are a near perfect form of determining the quality of a site, the problem is they can be manipulated.

This guy isn't really saying anything that we don't already know...

 

[manny521]

it read just like the standard google line to me - nothing too groundbreaking.

Maybe he was a toilet cleaner at google and not actually employed in search, that explains the linked in profile.

Exactly!