Search how to make your own sound

Intermediary transaction http://www.aliyun.com/zixun/aggregation/6858.html ">seo diagnose Taobao guest cloud host technology Hall

Tell, a few days ago to write Google is not opposed to hidden text, not because we "finally realized" hidden text, such as the use of technology in the field of SEO, or send a similar "Wow!" The original hidden text in Google is legitimate acceptable "kind of marvel, we are not yet idealized to that extent, but want to explore how the search engine should convey to the website builder and seoers accurate information that will not be misread, and how the site builders and Seoers view , interpretation of the relevant information from the search engine.

However, it seems that a lot of friends to disagree with this topic, or think we are a bit of a fuss, there are many misunderstandings, here, it may be extended to more detailed discussion of the search engine and site building interaction between. In this article, we will focus on how the search engine makes its own sound, and explores in detail how to interpret the search engine's voice in the next article.
Search engines should make their own sound rationally

Rational release of public information, not only for search engines should be so, in fact, for any mature enterprise, even if only want to give people "mature" the illusion of the enterprise is necessary. The loss of rationality, so that enterprises tend to approximate the "angry green" speech, will only let themselves appear ignorant, but also do not help the corporate image and brand building.

To give a simple example, the relationship between search engine and SEO, although according to some kind of closed thinking mode-although I believe that all the people who have been in the middle school have learned the dialectics of nature "Universal relations" theory, but inevitably some people will be immediately after the college entrance to the politics of the teacher, and wishful thinking that search engines can and only by search engines to control the rankings in search results-some search engines may think that if there is no such a so-called SEO (Search engine Optimization), the world will be like the star to strangle mosquitoes after the "quiet"; If there is no such thing as SEO or spam, a search engine can omit the investment in the fight against spam and devote more effort to the possibility of improving the quality of the search, although logically this possibility will always remain verbal; though I believe, Other search engine staff may have similar comments on private occasions, but I do not believe that a mature company would give a similar argument to the public:

"X is against SEO This behavior, all against, no compromise," x degree of Public relations manager Xu XX firmly told reporters, "We do not want to see a site itself did not improve, but mainly rely on our algorithm for opportunistic, we think it is cheating." X has a huge team to deal with such so-called optimization methods. ”

Note: There is no link to the source of the above quotations? A search of last year's news is easy to find.

Such a "resolute" is certainly courageous, perhaps the search engine just want to publicize its search results can exclude the impact of SEO, but really can achieve its intended purpose? I'm afraid not. Most people have seen, SEO even including spam can be in the search engine to obtain substantial benefits, this is objective, not with the search engine's subjective will for the transfer, take "ostrich policy" blindly denied only to increase the ridicule to entertain the public; second, from the most basic point of view, If you don't really improve your algorithms and mechanisms, regardless of its "deal with this so-called optimization" team how huge, want to rely on simple search engine artificial intervention to fight against spam, the result is probably only exhaustive, after all, although China's labor cheap, but its "huge team" always have a limit, It's always a small number compared to the sheer volume of web sites, and more importantly, a lot of strong fans, such as the most important technology in search engines, especially Chinese, is that people who sing tongue twisters start to think carefully about the pros and cons of different search engines.

This is, of course, an extreme example. I also believe that if you ask the search engine for similar questions today, it will give a more "slick" answer, or simply deny the above argument, such as a false reading of a reporter's interview and a distorted signal when it is reported to the media.
Search engine should have a clear attitude to the corresponding Seo/spam technology

The explicit attitude here does not mean that search engines have to disclose key information in the algorithm, but rather that there should be a definition of what can be done and that the grey areas in the middle should be defined, or, more simply, the bottom line that the search engine can accept.

Just blindly shouting "Do not cheat" is not the slightest significance, the search engine must be to a certain extent clear the limits of proper website optimization and cheating, only in the rules of the premise, can ensure that SEO within the framework of the search engine license to operate.

Otherwise, the rules on the table vague, it can only be the same, only the result can only be the unspoken rules of the road, which is almost eternal truth.

The rules given by search engines should be operable

Needless to said, for all aspects, especially to ensure the quality of search, search engine official information is mostly only "format" of the red tape, this is believed that most people can understand.

However, from another perspective, the rules given by the search engines, although different interpretations may come up with disparate conclusions, should at least have some maneuverability, not just obscure word games, or try to introduce web site building to the unknown mysticism category.

Does Google not object to hidden text? The reason we laugh at that passage is in this respect:

If your intent is purely to improve the visual user experience (e.g. by replacing some-text with a fancier-image of that mahouve text), You don ' t need to worry.

To put it simply, the problem with this passage is that the so-called "intent" is a standard nonsense, and any spammer can claim that its "intent" is so legitimate that it can be asserted in other fields, including the brain platinum, that its "intent is purely To enhance people's physique ", although the real effect is more to improve people's intelligence to help people more rational view of advertising, and when Google Judge spam and take possible follow-up measures, although the mechanism may be very complex may be judged by many conditions, But the condition will not include site construction or seoers "intent", after all, Google even if the cattle will not grasp what the mysterious "technology" such as Mind reading. This statement does not have any maneuverability.

Am I a fan of Matt Cutts?

Although I thought I was too old to adore someone, I wouldn't be a fan of a person like a kid, but I still have a lot of friends who think I'm a fan of Matt Cutts. Am I really?

But, as I said in Lu Ying's Yahoo search antispam group, Matt Cutts has done a pretty good job of getting the message right and the verbal rigor:

How to make the red tape tactful and secure the logical self consistency without revealing the key information or masking the loopholes and flaws of the ranking mechanism is very important, in which the avoidance of misleading, avoiding intimidation, and not giving the wrong message is a priority.