commenting as someone who sees blogs only via google results, and often prefers usenet
(archived)..
John Bokma <john@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> in
news:Xns97C9A20219C8Ccastleamber@xxxxxxxxxxx:
> Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> __/ [ John Bokma ] on Saturday 20 May 2006 15:55 \__
>>
>>> xptomarketing@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hello all
>>>>
>>>> I have one website where users give opinions about certain products.
>>>> I though that it could be good to make a script to create a single
>>>> page that would list all the opinions about each product. The pages
>>>> will be very long and have lots of the keywords so i guess it would
>>>> be good for seo.
>>>
>>> You mean like comments on a blog. Yup, good idea. Make sure that you
>>> review each comment, otherwise you end up with a heaven for spammers.
>>
>> Only if URL's are permitted, in my humble opinion.
>
> Based on the amount of crappy comments I see without a link, I would say
> check anyway. Unless you are happy with comments like:
>
> OMG!!!!! this suckzzzzzzz!!
yo, brigz!
>> Spam floods have
>> come as far as the MATLAB main site before some basic checks and
>> CPATCHA were added. It was a huge embarrassment. Remember: no links =
>> no incentive. rel="nofollow" is unlikely to save the day.
>
> Yup, rel="nofollow" was a bad idea in the first place. Sadly a lot of
> badly thought out software uses it as default, breaking the web.
and won't that have no effect on http(etc) written in plain text (spam)?
>>> I recommend to add at least a short summary of the product to that
>>> page. Otherwise you end up with plenty of initially empty pages.
>>> Don't be amazed if most pages never get a comment. It goes slow on my
>>> site. Yet it is free content, so I am not complaining. And on topic
>>> :-)
quality vs quantity. a few sites i've found and upfoldered and decided are informative (etc). i
then have bookmarked (but admit i've never gone back :-) )
>> John, comments are dying very quickly. Just about any news site
>> reserves a place for comments. On top of that, with nearly 100
>> milllion blogs (that grown exponentially) with roughly 100 posts in
>> each, you're talking about many billions of places where comments can
>> be left. Unless you are a Web giant, comments are becoming passe.
>
> Depends on what is on the page, really. Moreover, a virgin page (0
> comments) gets less comments added then one with already one comment on
> the page. Comments do happen if your page is attractive enough.
>
> And passe, I mean, that's the same as saying, look at the huge amount of
> pages in Google, what's the point of writing a new page?
so "yo, birigz" shows up one more time.
sometimes finding bookmarks.html page online is good. some have compact collections of
interesting and *truly* related links.
> Like I said, comments are free content. Even my "empty" comment pages
> with just the first paragraph copied from the "mother" page gets hits.
> Later on I want to write a real summary, instead of the copy, which
> might make the pages get even more hits, even if they are empty.
>
> I get now and then comments added to blog entries dat are 6+ months old.
then it's a good comment page. certainly not ephemeral. wayback it before it dies. :-)
>> It
>> seems to me like the conversion rate is often 1 comment per 1000 page
>> views. But it varies depending on the site, of course. I see this in
>> the context of reviews too. In MATLAB, I got about 30 reviews for over
>> 30,000 genuine downloads (not pageviews).
>
> But if you hadn't added that page you would have 0 reviews and one page
> less :-)
>
> Moreover, I am sure people do read those reviews, and might even
> recommend them to others. I have read reviews on the camera I recently
> bought, but haven't written one on someone else's site :-D. I do want to
> write one, on my own site ;-)
--
"yo, birgz suCKzzzZzz" :-)
|
|
