why Search Engine Marketing And SEO need to be regulated - GoFuckYourself.com

webmasterchecks · 07-13-2009, 01:05 PM

read this article on techcrunch, some interesting points

Imagine, if you will, that the entire Internet is contained within a single continent. That continent is filled with countries, states and cities. Each jurisdiction is autonomous, relying on visitors to cross on to their turf to engage in commerce. Now, imagine if the only way to get into this continent involved just two methods: SEO and SEM. Let?s further imagine that the borders to this continent were controlled by a single company. Let?s also hold that the rules for search engine optimization listings and search engine marketing were not only defined but were completely controlled at the whim of this single company. Of course, we all realize that word-of-mouth marketing and viral marketing also contribute to traffic to individual websites. That said, the primary methodology for all users to reach any individual website destination is still search, of either paid or organic listings.

Or suppose the paradigm is the streets of Los Angeles. Let?s imagine that in order to enter the city you had to pass through a single gate. And once you entered that gate, the streets you were or were not allowed to go down ? and thus the businesses you were or were not allowed to visit ? could be randomly blocked from your access. Blocked to a point where you might not even know they exist; whatever streets were available for you to traverse were in essence the only streets you knew where business could be transacted.

http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/07/13...eting-and-seo/

Machete_ · 07-13-2009, 01:11 PM

and then what? you want to regulate newspaper adds as well? How about people just use their head

BestXXXPorn · 07-13-2009, 01:16 PM

Hahaha yeah that's really what we need... more regulation, hhhahhaha

I loled pretty hard...

Imagine this made up situation, image this hypothetical, imagine this metaphor, imagine, imagine, imagine...

Everything in that post suggests an impossible scenario... how can I possibly relate to anything relevant...

marketsmart · 07-13-2009, 01:17 PM

the last thing we need is more regulation for anything other than the dumb fucks on wall street and bankers.

the interwebs is just fine the way it is..

i would like to see content thieves and fraudsters blocked, but then that just opens the door for regulation..

the world is not a perfect place so why should the internet be any different..

Pleasurepays · 07-13-2009, 01:17 PM

yes!!! we should tell everyone what to say on the internet! i want that job!!

pornguy · 07-13-2009, 01:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by marketsmart

the last thing we need is more regulation for anything other than the dumb fucks on wall street and bankers.

the interwebs is just fine the way it is..

i would like to see content thieves and fraudsters blocked, but then that just opens the door for regulation..

the world is not a perfect place so why should the internet be any different..

we need less credit and more real hard cash.

But yeah I agree 100%

Machete_ · 07-13-2009, 01:20 PM

People that come up with shit like this, is the same people that dont understand why their blog arent Top5 on google for every word in the post-title

ilbb · 07-13-2009, 01:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KrisH

People that come up with shit like this, is the same people that dont understand why their blog arent Top5 on google for every word in the post-title

WiredGuy · 07-13-2009, 01:39 PM

Sounds like this was written by someone who can't get good rankings.
WG

d-null · 07-13-2009, 01:40 PM

seeandsee · 07-13-2009, 01:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BestXXXPorn

I loled pretty hard...

I LOLED WITH FULL POWER

96ukssob · 07-13-2009, 01:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WiredGuy

Sounds like this was written by someone who can't get good rankings.
WG

yes definitely true.

I get an ear full number of times a day from customers and clients complaining about competition on paid search and hows its effecting their business. to me, its the same as television or radio ads. what people don't understand is its the businesses that are driving up the cost of advertising, NOT Google, Yahoo, MSN, etc.

For instance, I was talking with someone last week who wants to start a commercial real estate campaign. They want to bid on words like "make money," "retire early" and "flip houses." These have NOTHING to do with commercial real estate, but in their eyes, they think if someone is looking to make money, they would buy their commercial lot and resell it.

its people like this that dont get how search works, then spend 30 minutes writing an article about how unfair life is and only big sites with big budgets gets results.

Same goes for these "bottom feeders" that want to spend $50/mo on AdWords and expect to make $1million in return.

count of monte cristo · 07-30-2009, 09:17 AM

For much of its history, Google has responded to most criticism with two words: Trust us. The company has repeatedly persuaded skeptics that its immensity is a mere byproduct of its altruistic mission and that the algorithms it uses to organize the Internet, while proprietary, are objective and benevolent. But in an economy destroyed by bad faith, secretive formulas, and complicated mathematics, trust is in short supply, and Google's assurances are losing their persuasive power.

This disconnect became particularly apparent in September when Schmidt met with Thomas Barnett, the DOJ's antitrust chief at the time, to defend the deal. Barnett was shocked when Schmidt made Google's character?its constitutional aversion to all things evil and its commitment to operating on a higher moral plane?a central part of his argument. The line of thinking resonated throughout the DOJ. Weeks later, in one of Barnett's final meetings with Google and Yahoo lawyers, he made it clear he had little patience for Google's "trust us" refrain. He ended one question by warning: "Please don't tell me the answer is, 'Because the parties wouldn't do anything wrong.'"

In and of itself, Google's size is not a legal problem. Varney herself has pointed out that, while Google may enjoy a monopoly in the search-ad business, the company acquired it legally by building better search products that competitors were simply unable to match. Lawyers and economists say that things get complicated, though, when Google moves beyond search and into Web services like online spreadsheets and video sites. Because its search and advertising algorithms are secret, there is no way for competitors or partners to know whether Google tweaks results to direct traffic to its own properties over theirs. Enter a street address into Google's search engine, for instance, and Google Maps tops the results. Type in "Britney Spears" and Google News comes up before People magazine or TMZ .com. (Google-owned YouTube tops the video results, above MTV and MySpace.) If Google is using its search position to promote its other businesses, that could leave it open to charges of illegal bundling and leveraging?the same charges that Microsoft faced for packaging its browser onto the Windows desktop. And even if Google is behaving honorably now, it is creating a system full of temptations should the company ever come under financial pressure. "When things get tight," one advertising partner says, "whose bottom line will get sacrificed first? The answer is self-evident."

http://www.wired.com/techbiz/it/maga...?currentPage=1

Because public companies are after the dollar and while they can have a good front, it disappears after a while. take microsoft as an example

Nautilus · 07-30-2009, 12:04 PM

Eventually some ambitious startup will pop up with the new competitive search option that will be a real alternative to google - they're not sealed at their position of dominant internet search engine as tight as people think they are.

Or probably the cloud search technologies that are under active development now will render the whole concept of one search engine for all users obsolete.

flip.green · 07-30-2009, 12:11 PM

Regulations just make shit more expensive.
Business has to pay extra so customers pay extra.
The only people who benefit in the end are bureaucrats.
The get all the bribes and pensions. But on the upshot they usually get the ugly women too so bleh.

James124 · 07-30-2009, 12:16 PM

noose yourself!

San · 07-30-2009, 12:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by webmasterchecks

read this article on techcrunch, some interesting points

Imagine, if you will, that the entire Internet is contained within a single continent. That continent is filled with countries, states and cities. Each jurisdiction is autonomous, relying on visitors to cross on to their turf to engage in commerce. Now, imagine if the only way to get into this continent involved just two methods: SEO and SEM. Let?s further imagine that the borders to this continent were controlled by a single company. Let?s also hold that the rules for search engine optimization listings and search engine marketing were not only defined but were completely controlled at the whim of this single company. Of course, we all realize that word-of-mouth marketing and viral marketing also contribute to traffic to individual websites. That said, the primary methodology for all users to reach any individual website destination is still search, of either paid or organic listings.

Or suppose the paradigm is the streets of Los Angeles. Let?s imagine that in order to enter the city you had to pass through a single gate. And once you entered that gate, the streets you were or were not allowed to go down ? and thus the businesses you were or were not allowed to visit ? could be randomly blocked from your access. Blocked to a point where you might not even know they exist; whatever streets were available for you to traverse were in essence the only streets you knew where business could be transacted.

http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/07/13...eting-and-seo/

tranza · 07-30-2009, 01:17 PM

This is most stupid thing I've ever heard. I'm sure it was wirtten by a nerd that never leaves his house. He simply forgets about all the other midia types.

Licentious · 08-30-2009, 09:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by webmasterchecks

read this article on techcrunch, some interesting points

Imagine, if you will, that the entire Internet is contained within a single continent. That continent is filled with countries, states and cities. Each jurisdiction is autonomous, relying on visitors to cross on to their turf to engage in commerce. Now, imagine if the only way to get into this continent involved just two methods: SEO and SEM. Let?s further imagine that the borders to this continent were controlled by a single company. Let?s also hold that the rules for search engine optimization listings and search engine marketing were not only defined but were completely controlled at the whim of this single company. Of course, we all realize that word-of-mouth marketing and viral marketing also contribute to traffic to individual websites. That said, the primary methodology for all users to reach any individual website destination is still search, of either paid or organic listings.

Or suppose the paradigm is the streets of Los Angeles. Let?s imagine that in order to enter the city you had to pass through a single gate. And once you entered that gate, the streets you were or were not allowed to go down ? and thus the businesses you were or were not allowed to visit ? could be randomly blocked from your access. Blocked to a point where you might not even know they exist; whatever streets were available for you to traverse were in essence the only streets you knew where business could be transacted.

http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/07/13...eting-and-seo/

This is a brilliant idea from someone in the adult industry. Lets regulate the internet and let the government decide what we can see! Yeah, you'll be out of a job quickly enough...

seeric · 08-30-2009, 09:42 AM

most retarded thing i've ever wasted time reading.

baddog · 08-30-2009, 09:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by A1R3K

most retarded thing i've ever wasted time reading.

You talking about the thread or the article?

Voodoo · 08-30-2009, 09:52 AM

The only people who would write, or believe this garbage, are those who can't get good ranking, and can't afford to have it done.

seeric · 08-30-2009, 09:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by baddog

You talking about the thread or the article?

both.

woj · 08-30-2009, 10:34 AM

there is some truth to what the guy says, they actually do have the internet by the balls... they can destroy any business at any time for any reason...

AtlantisCash · 08-30-2009, 10:49 AM

Regulations my ass, use Your brain Which is given to You by GOD, Stop bitching and asking for regulation everything You're suck about.

Edit: this Message does not pointed to the op but general.

AtlantisCash · 08-30-2009, 10:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Voodoo

The only people who would write, or believe this garbage, are those who can't get good ranking, and can't afford to have it done.

Agreed, idiots always blame others for their own clumsiness

babebuns · 08-30-2009, 10:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by webmasterchecks

Let?s imagine that in order to enter the city you had to pass through a single gate.

The internet is a series of tubes.

Dirty Dane · 08-30-2009, 11:00 AM

The main objective should not be getting traffic from surfers who bookmarked Google, but to get people bookmarking your site.

count of monte cristo · 08-30-2009, 02:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Licentious

This is a brilliant idea from someone in the adult industry. Lets regulate the internet and let the government decide what we can see! Yeah, you'll be out of a job quickly enough...

hard to trust google, but im a cynic

Quote:

Originally Posted by count of monte cristo

For much of its history, Google has responded to most criticism with two words: Trust us. The company has repeatedly persuaded skeptics that its immensity is a mere byproduct of its altruistic mission and that the algorithms it uses to organize the Internet, while proprietary, are objective and benevolent. But in an economy destroyed by bad faith, secretive formulas, and complicated mathematics, trust is in short supply, and Google's assurances are losing their persuasive power.

This disconnect became particularly apparent in September when Schmidt met with Thomas Barnett, the DOJ's antitrust chief at the time, to defend the deal. Barnett was shocked when Schmidt made Google's character—its constitutional aversion to all things evil and its commitment to operating on a higher moral plane—a central part of his argument. The line of thinking resonated throughout the DOJ. Weeks later, in one of Barnett's final meetings with Google and Yahoo lawyers, he made it clear he had little patience for Google's "trust us" refrain. He ended one question by warning: "Please don't tell me the answer is, 'Because the parties wouldn't do anything wrong.'"

In and of itself, Google's size is not a legal problem. Varney herself has pointed out that, while Google may enjoy a monopoly in the search-ad business, the company acquired it legally by building better search products that competitors were simply unable to match. Lawyers and economists say that things get complicated, though, when Google moves beyond search and into Web services like online spreadsheets and video sites. Because its search and advertising algorithms are secret, there is no way for competitors or partners to know whether Google tweaks results to direct traffic to its own properties over theirs. Enter a street address into Google's search engine, for instance, and Google Maps tops the results. Type in "Britney Spears" and Google News comes up before People magazine or TMZ .com. (Google-owned YouTube tops the video results, above MTV and MySpace.) If Google is using its search position to promote its other businesses, that could leave it open to charges of illegal bundling and leveraging—the same charges that Microsoft faced for packaging its browser onto the Windows desktop. And even if Google is behaving honorably now, it is creating a system full of temptations should the company ever come under financial pressure. "When things get tight," one advertising partner says, "whose bottom line will get sacrificed first? The answer is self-evident."

http://www.wired.com/techbiz/it/maga...?currentPage=1

Licentious · 08-30-2009, 02:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Voodoo

The only people who would write, or believe this garbage, are those who can't get good ranking, and can't afford to have it done.

Ding! People who write slam articles on ethical search marketing are the same idiots who pay for local listings and pay other companies to run 2 keyword term PPC programs for them. Oh well, they dont know what they're missing.

Bravo · 08-30-2009, 02:28 PM

this is not serious

07-13-2009, 01:05 PM	#1
webmasterchecks Confirmed User Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Phoenix Posts: 1,685	why Search Engine Marketing And SEO need to be regulated read this article on techcrunch, some interesting points Imagine, if you will, that the entire Internet is contained within a single continent. That continent is filled with countries, states and cities. Each jurisdiction is autonomous, relying on visitors to cross on to their turf to engage in commerce. Now, imagine if the only way to get into this continent involved just two methods: SEO and SEM. Let?s further imagine that the borders to this continent were controlled by a single company. Let?s also hold that the rules for search engine optimization listings and search engine marketing were not only defined but were completely controlled at the whim of this single company. Of course, we all realize that word-of-mouth marketing and viral marketing also contribute to traffic to individual websites. That said, the primary methodology for all users to reach any individual website destination is still search, of either paid or organic listings. Or suppose the paradigm is the streets of Los Angeles. Let?s imagine that in order to enter the city you had to pass through a single gate. And once you entered that gate, the streets you were or were not allowed to go down ? and thus the businesses you were or were not allowed to visit ? could be randomly blocked from your access. Blocked to a point where you might not even know they exist; whatever streets were available for you to traverse were in essence the only streets you knew where business could be transacted. http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/07/13...eting-and-seo/ __________________ Webmasterchecks Affiliate Payments - fully compatible with nats/mpa3

07-13-2009, 01:16 PM	#3
BestXXXPorn Confirmed User Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: Asheville, NC Posts: 2,277	Hahaha yeah that's really what we need... more regulation, hhhahhaha I loled pretty hard... Imagine this made up situation, image this hypothetical, imagine this metaphor, imagine, imagine, imagine... Everything in that post suggests an impossible scenario... how can I possibly relate to anything relevant... __________________ ICQ: 258-202-811 \| Email: eric{at}bestxxxporn.com

07-13-2009, 01:39 PM	#9
WiredGuy Pounding Googlebot Industry Role: Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: Canada Posts: 34,479	Sounds like this was written by someone who can't get good rankings. WG __________________ I play with Google.

07-13-2009, 01:40 PM	#10
d-null . . . Industry Role: Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: NY Posts: 13,724	__________________ __________________ Looking for a custom TUBE SCRIPT that supports massive traffic, load balancing, billing support, and h264 encoding? Hit up Konrad! Looking for designs for your websites or custom tubesite design? Hit up Zuzana Designs Check out the #1 WordPress SEO Plugin: CyberSEO Suite

07-30-2009, 09:17 AM	#13
count of monte cristo Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: monte cristo Posts: 473	For much of its history, Google has responded to most criticism with two words: Trust us. The company has repeatedly persuaded skeptics that its immensity is a mere byproduct of its altruistic mission and that the algorithms it uses to organize the Internet, while proprietary, are objective and benevolent. But in an economy destroyed by bad faith, secretive formulas, and complicated mathematics, trust is in short supply, and Google's assurances are losing their persuasive power. This disconnect became particularly apparent in September when Schmidt met with Thomas Barnett, the DOJ's antitrust chief at the time, to defend the deal. Barnett was shocked when Schmidt made Google's character?its constitutional aversion to all things evil and its commitment to operating on a higher moral plane?a central part of his argument. The line of thinking resonated throughout the DOJ. Weeks later, in one of Barnett's final meetings with Google and Yahoo lawyers, he made it clear he had little patience for Google's "trust us" refrain. He ended one question by warning: "Please don't tell me the answer is, 'Because the parties wouldn't do anything wrong.'" In and of itself, Google's size is not a legal problem. Varney herself has pointed out that, while Google may enjoy a monopoly in the search-ad business, the company acquired it legally by building better search products that competitors were simply unable to match. Lawyers and economists say that things get complicated, though, when Google moves beyond search and into Web services like online spreadsheets and video sites. Because its search and advertising algorithms are secret, there is no way for competitors or partners to know whether Google tweaks results to direct traffic to its own properties over theirs. Enter a street address into Google's search engine, for instance, and Google Maps tops the results. Type in "Britney Spears" and Google News comes up before People magazine or TMZ .com. (Google-owned YouTube tops the video results, above MTV and MySpace.) If Google is using its search position to promote its other businesses, that could leave it open to charges of illegal bundling and leveraging?the same charges that Microsoft faced for packaging its browser onto the Windows desktop. And even if Google is behaving honorably now, it is creating a system full of temptations should the company ever come under financial pressure. "When things get tight," one advertising partner says, "whose bottom line will get sacrificed first? The answer is self-evident." http://www.wired.com/techbiz/it/maga...?currentPage=1 Because public companies are after the dollar and while they can have a good front, it disappears after a while. take microsoft as an example __________________ premier payment sending company

07-13-2009, 01:11 PM	#2
Machete_ WINNING! Industry Role: Join Date: Oct 2002 Posts: 14,579	and then what? you want to regulate newspaper adds as well? How about people just use their head

07-13-2009, 01:17 PM	#4
marketsmart HOMICIDAL TROLL KILLER Industry Role: Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Sunnybrook Institution for the Criminally Insane Posts: 20,419	the last thing we need is more regulation for anything other than the dumb fucks on wall street and bankers. the interwebs is just fine the way it is.. i would like to see content thieves and fraudsters blocked, but then that just opens the door for regulation.. the world is not a perfect place so why should the internet be any different..

07-13-2009, 01:17 PM	#5
Pleasurepays BANNED - SUPPORTING TUBES Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: I live in a pile of boogers Posts: 11,913	yes!!! we should tell everyone what to say on the internet! i want that job!!

07-13-2009, 01:20 PM	#7
Machete_ WINNING! Industry Role: Join Date: Oct 2002 Posts: 14,579	People that come up with shit like this, is the same people that dont understand why their blog arent Top5 on google for every word in the post-title

07-30-2009, 12:04 PM	#14
Nautilus Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 1,631	Eventually some ambitious startup will pop up with the new competitive search option that will be a real alternative to google - they're not sealed at their position of dominant internet search engine as tight as people think they are. Or probably the cloud search technologies that are under active development now will render the whole concept of one search engine for all users obsolete. __________________ . . FerroCash - 50+ quality niche paysites to promote \| 100K+ FHGs \| Check recently added galleries New sites \| Pantyhose \| Nylon \| Shemale \| Strapon \| Lesbian \| Mature/MILF \| Anal \| Old&Young \| Gay \| Feet Morphing RSS feeds - check them at the Official blog\| Page Peels (Sample 1 : Sample 2) Wish to review or evaluate our sites before promoting them? Contact me for free password. ICQ: 38.89.22.76 e-mail: support AT ferrocash.com

07-30-2009, 12:11 PM	#15
flip.green Confirmed User Join Date: Jun 2009 Posts: 228	Regulations just make shit more expensive. Business has to pay extra so customers pay extra. The only people who benefit in the end are bureaucrats. The get all the bribes and pensions. But on the upshot they usually get the ugly women too so bleh. __________________ Shemales so good looking your mom would approve ICQ# 585156759

07-30-2009, 12:16 PM	#16
James124 So Fucking Banned Join Date: Jun 2006 Posts: 261	noose yourself!

07-30-2009, 01:17 PM	#18
tranza ICQ: 197-556-237 Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: BRASIL !!! Posts: 57,559	This is most stupid thing I've ever heard. I'm sure it was wirtten by a nerd that never leaves his house. He simply forgets about all the other midia types. __________________ I'm just a newbie.

08-30-2009, 09:42 AM	#20
seeric .......... Industry Role: Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: .......... Posts: 41,917	most retarded thing i've ever wasted time reading.

08-30-2009, 09:52 AM	#22
Voodoo ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ Industry Role: Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Porn Valley, CA Posts: 10,590	The only people who would write, or believe this garbage, are those who can't get good ranking, and can't afford to have it done. __________________ "I'm selflessly supporting the common good, but only coincidentally looking out for No.1."

08-30-2009, 10:34 AM	#24
woj <&(©¿©)&> Industry Role: Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Chicago Posts: 47,882	there is some truth to what the guy says, they actually do have the internet by the balls... they can destroy any business at any time for any reason... __________________ Custom Software Development, email: woj#at#wojfun#.#com to discuss details or skype: wojl2000 or gchat: wojfun or telegram: wojl2000 Affiliate program tools: Hosted Galleries Manager Banner Manager Video Manager Wordpress Affiliate Plugin Pic/Movie of the Day Fansign Generator Zip Manager

08-30-2009, 10:49 AM	#25
AtlantisCash Confirmed User Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: Istanbul - Turkiye Posts: 3,179	Regulations my ass, use Your brain Which is given to You by GOD, Stop bitching and asking for regulation everything You're suck about. Edit: this Message does not pointed to the op but general.

08-30-2009, 11:00 AM	#28
Dirty Dane Sick Fuck Industry Role: Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: www Posts: 9,491	The main objective should not be getting traffic from surfers who bookmarked Google, but to get people bookmarking your site.

08-30-2009, 02:28 PM	#31
Bravo Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Internet Posts: 393	this is not serious __________________