5 Easy Steps To Scare A SES or Pubcon Conference Attendee

Dec 5, 2006 • 12:27 pm | comments (1) by twitter Google+ | Filed Under Search Engine Conferences Coverage
 

Since I am not at the conference this week in Chicago. I figured it might be fitting to take a page from Matt Cutts, and post a step by step how to guide on How To Successfully Scare the Living Daylights Out of an Unassuming Conference Attendee. Speakers have the unique opportunity to not only terrorize their audience but also make their audience laugh at their bad jokes and make them expose secret private identifying information that could be used to reveal their whole network of sites. Quite the advantage a speaker has! Members at Webmasterworld have been discussing this topic and have some ideas on the best ways to scare a conference attendee and ways Google can learn about all your website. So in the conference spirit, here is a revised step by step guide on how to scare a conference attendee:

1. Whois their main site 2. Reverse IP the main site's IP address 3. Whois a random sample of the 50 or so sites being hosted on the same IP 4. If the sample sites have the same private registration with the same registrar and the same nameservers, announce that the person is running all 50 sites. 5. Flash laptop with magic tool but don't reveal anything, say something about "unrelated domains were unnecessary at best and, at worst, possibly harmful to their SERPs." Stare webmaster in the eyes and mumble something again about "dirty spammers".

At this point you will have scared the living daylights out of a conference attendee. Congratulations! Now, pat yourself on the back and move on to the next webmaster. Ebenezer Scrooge could not have been meaner.

Continued discussion at WMW - Matt Cutts On Having Lots Of Sites

Previous story: Bulk Submit 2.0
 

Comments:

Keri Morgret

12/05/2006 05:58 pm

A faster, but less accurate way, is to go to http://www.aboutus.org/. The site gathers information from many Whois databases and lists possibly related domains, and is often fairly accurate.

blog comments powered by Disqus