RECENT COMMENTS ON SEARCH ENGINE ROUNDTABLE

Below are the most recent 30 comments. I try to keep it clean of comment spam, but some times things get through and it takes me several hours to get to it. So please excuse any of that comment spam.

Subscribe  Subscribe to Recent Comments

Comment ID #2505245721 at 02/09/2016 07:10 pm:

Olena Eaton commented on Google AdWords Keyword Status May Be Incorrect

Thank you! Good to know.

Comment ID #2505237814 at 02/09/2016 07:03 pm:

Optimology SEO commented on Google Testing Mobile Ranking Changes?

Not sure I agree with your emphasis on maths, Ted. If I flick a light switch and the light goes on, without maths I can accurately say there's a correlation between the two. Correlation in itself doesn't amount to much. Causation is different and we would require more science for that but, as I said, with nearly everything Google does we are guessing. As ever I'm arguing and hoping I'm wrong. Must be a Scottish thing. I suppose what you're saying is we need to flick the switch on and off a few times to see if even the correlation can be accepted. Fair enough, but I think in our bellies we all know this is just a matter of time. I'm sure Google didn't build that mobile testing tool for nothing.

Comment ID #2505225731 at 02/09/2016 06:54 pm:

Ted commented on Google Testing Mobile Ranking Changes?

I can appreciate that. It's only correlation if we've done the proper math. Otherwise its an opinion. Without that math we are just deciding the conclusions with random coin tosses. If people are going to cause alarm then the math should be done... especially coming from a PHD experimentalist. But I do give him props for collecting and using data.

Comment ID #2505214078 at 02/09/2016 06:45 pm:

Optimology SEO commented on Google Testing Mobile Ranking Changes?

Ted, I admire your enthusiasm but in every assumption we make regarding Google we are left with nothing but rather tenuous correlations. Regarding the apparent adjustments which suggest a recent positive bias towards mobile-friendly sites, in the absence of any countervailing evidence, I think the correlation must be assumed to be meaningful. It's noteworthy that nobody else seems to be screaming about other adjustments that might explain away the evidence suggested at above; if other factors were at the root of this, my guess is we'd have heard about those other factors by now (millions of people are monitoring this stuff day and night). Anyway, I hope I'm wrong and I hope this is just some sort of anomaly or blip or something. I have about 40 sites to fix, if it's true.

Comment ID #2505141981 at 02/09/2016 05:53 pm:

Simon commented on Google Testing Mobile Ranking Changes?

You're confusing multiple points. I'm not commenting on the validity of any experiments and I don't care for the state of the profession; I'm not an SEO. The point is simply that, unlike some others, Dr Pete's qualifications *are* useful in this line of work IMO. What would you consider an acceptable doctorate to be able to quote for an SEO? A Ph.D in computer science? That is potentially of little use here. Your point about medical doctors and planes is also confused. A medical professional doesn't need a Ph.D. to call themselves a doctor and no-one here is pretending to be a medical doctor so it's an invalid point. Perhaps you have issue generally with people quoting their qualifications as part of their name/title as it comes across as arrogant? I'd agree with that, but that wasn't your point.

Comment ID #2505139985 at 02/09/2016 05:51 pm:

Miya commented on Google Maps Murder At 52.376552,5.198303 In Netherlands

She also said cuallified..

Comment ID #2505045026 at 02/09/2016 04:49 pm:

Billy Mays commented on Google Testing Mobile Ranking Changes?

Meh, this did occur to me previously but I feel different. 'Round here, you would be hired to set up experiments and see them out because that is something you have been properly trained for. As far as the business end of the stick goes I would have little trust. Makes no difference anyway. When par for the profession is a GED, you're not gonna convince anyone like this of anything. He gots the moneys.

Comment ID #2505018728 at 02/09/2016 04:33 pm:

Billy Mays commented on Google Testing Mobile Ranking Changes?

Exactly, there is one correct way to say that (the first way) and many incorrect ways to pronounce the word as well (ex #2).

Comment ID #2504842246 at 02/09/2016 02:47 pm:

Simon commented on Google Testing Mobile Ranking Changes?

Yes and no. Dr Pete is a Ph.D. in experimental psychology, which IMO contributes greatly to the understanding of user behaviour on the web. It's something I've also studied and found extremely useful in this respect and I know others who benefit similarly. On the other hand, I do agree that, say, using that fact that you're a doctor in veterinary matters is rather cheeky.

Comment ID #2504742725 at 02/09/2016 01:50 pm:

MeatHead commented on Google Investigating Polish Hacker Who Is Stealing Webmaster Traffic

Google can recognize duplicates. It's just that Google chooses not to do anything about it. Think about this.... Google has built their empire on organizing, scraping and monetizing the work of other people. Google is no better than polish hackers, bot scrapers and other thieving slimeballs that want steal our content to make a buck. Google just happens to be a lot better at doing it and has lobbyists to keep regulators and politicians off their back.

Comment ID #2504738944 at 02/09/2016 01:48 pm:

Ted commented on Google Testing Mobile Ranking Changes?

Don't get me wrong... I like where you are going with this. There is just 15% more work that needs to happen for this to pass peer review. Don't stop what you are doing... just take it all the way to completion.

Comment ID #2504726957 at 02/09/2016 01:41 pm:

Ted commented on Google Testing Mobile Ranking Changes?

If you don't measure the correlation with ranking position then you don't know if mobile-friendliness went up or down no matter which way the % occurrences changed. The percentages for mobile friendliness can change because they boosted an unrelated factor. But the correlation might not change much if they did that. The percentage could increase and the correlation with ranking position could decrease. Sure you can say volatility but you can't actually say it was due to mobile friendliness... you need to calculate the correlation coefficients to assert that.

Comment ID #2504725950 at 02/09/2016 01:41 pm:

Damon Rutherford | Digitator commented on Google Says They Care About Businesses & Webmasters

I think the issue here is that if you have an issue with your website and fall foul of Google you should be able to recover to a ranking position to where your various website metrics indicate you should be within a reasonable period of time, provided you've fixed whatever issues your website had. As has been referenced by Aaron Wall, many companies, and their website teams, are under considerable pressure to remove penalties by eliminating usability, content and back link issues from their websites. Not running these updates regularly strikes me as unfair, especially when many of those affected didn't deliberately try to game the system. In my experience this is especially true with Panda effected sites. BTW I'd be interested to hear if anyone has actually seen a Panda recovery since the last "update" in July 2015? I've yet to read of anything significant - I'd love to hear any updates from anyone that has. Ps. I wrote an article on this subject recently if anyone is interested: https://econsultancy.com/blog/66959-is-google-playing-fair-in-search/

Comment ID #2504719350 at 02/09/2016 01:37 pm:

Dr. Pete commented on Google Testing Mobile Ranking Changes?

Whether this means Google has shifted the algorithm, updated their data, or completely redefined what "mobile-friendly" means is a different, and perfectly valid question. I'm not claiming this is an algorithm update - I'm tracking a metric over time and trying to dive into why it changed dramatically overnight.

Comment ID #2504715963 at 02/09/2016 01:35 pm:

Dr. Pete commented on Google Testing Mobile Ranking Changes?

If we simply saw a feature with very high prevalence on SERPs, we couldn't tie it to ranking. That's true. As you said, every organic result has a link - that's useless information. We know, though, that "mobile-friendly" URLs are substantively different from "unfriendly" (as judged by Google, right or wrong) URLs, and we're seeing the prevalence of those URLs increase dramatically over time. This suggests that Google is squeezing out unfriendly URLs. We're also seeing divergence between desktop SERPs and mobile SERPs, whereas they used to mirror each other closely. The UI and features differed, but if you were #2 for a query on desktop, you'd usually be right around #2 on mobile. That seems to be changing, which is important.

Comment ID #2504696145 at 02/09/2016 01:24 pm:

Ted commented on Google Testing Mobile Ranking Changes?

Technically you can have a lower percentage of occurrences on page one with higher correlation with ranking position... If you don't do this properly you don't actually know what you are measuring.

Comment ID #2504681543 at 02/09/2016 01:15 pm:

Dr. Pete commented on Google Testing Mobile Ranking Changes?

To be clear, we're tracking two things: (1) volatility in mobile SERPs vs. desktop SERPs, and (2) changes, over time, in how many mobile URLs have the "mobile-friendly designator. A couple of time this week, there has been very high volatility in mobile SERPs but not desktop SERPs, and the "mobile-friendly" URL percentage has spiked (which is just a percentage of total URLs tracked). If that percentage continues to jump, it indicates that Google is making good on their original "mobilegeddon" promise and that there's a divergence of desktop and mobile SERPs. This isn't a ranking-factor study - it's observational data.

Comment ID #2504595721 at 02/09/2016 12:28 pm:

Ted commented on Google Testing Mobile Ranking Changes?

I agree. Without a correlation coefficient this measures the popularity of the practice and not any correlation with ranking advantage. For example... 100% of page one results have a home page link in the navigation, but the Correlation Coefficient is close to 0 because they don't statistically trend with ranking position... a.k.a. not a meaningful ranking factor. Until they do this properly their findings are very unscientific.

Comment ID #2504521984 at 02/09/2016 11:46 am:

Billy Mays commented on Google Testing Mobile Ranking Changes?

It's considered to be inappropriate in many scenarios because it is deceptive. If you are trying to get people to buy a product from you like a SaaS product, then it is considered to be unethical IMHO. Basically just a scam that folks can still sleep at night about. If any PHDs out there disagree, next time you are on an airplane and someone asks if there is a doctor o board - run your ass up there, tell them you are a doctor, but then politely explain that you are a different kind of doctor, not the one they need. I'm sure they will agree, you do indeed have the right to call yourself a doctor, but maybe it's best if ya dont do that all of the time.

Comment ID #2504500595 at 02/09/2016 11:33 am:

Adam commented on Google Testing Mobile Ranking Changes?

Tomato, tomato.

Comment ID #2504439571 at 02/09/2016 11:08 am:

LJ commented on Google Testing Mobile Ranking Changes?

I always thought it strange - unless you are a Doctor in the field that you're working in, I don't know why people have to be called it... guess it just makes them sound smarter.

Comment ID #2504371661 at 02/09/2016 10:26 am:

Billy Mays commented on Google Testing Mobile Ranking Changes?

I called you an internet marketer. You are giving yourself too much credit.

Comment ID #2504357894 at 02/09/2016 10:17 am:

asdf commented on Google Testing Mobile Ranking Changes?

No correlation coefficient. No critical values. how do you know if your data is statistically significant?How strong is this correlation? Please do the math correctly.

Comment ID #2504349949 at 02/09/2016 10:12 am:

Barry Schwartz commented on Google Testing Mobile Ranking Changes?

You are nice.

Comment ID #2504328444 at 02/09/2016 09:58 am:

Dr. Pete commented on Google Testing Mobile Ranking Changes?

I don't insist on anything - you can call me "Pete" or "jack-ass", if you like. I do have a Ph.D. in Experimental Psychology, and "Dr. Pete" has been good for branding. I am a marketer, as you said.

Comment ID #2504281686 at 02/09/2016 09:26 am:

Billy Mays commented on Google Testing Mobile Ranking Changes?

I love it when internet marketers insist on being called doctor.

Comment ID #2504271656 at 02/09/2016 09:19 am:

Ben Guest commented on Google Spammy Structured Markup Manual Actions Spike Because Of WordPress Recipe Plugins

https://wordpress.org/support/topic/google-ban https://productforums.google.com/forum/#!profile/webmasters/APn2wQfvOcBjk8B_XWi9pfoDlH3baF9NFTNMhjHJ2MknXLaXwMHndNrVsSO9C58MwSOu6KsXZQ4P

Comment ID #2504250260 at 02/09/2016 09:03 am:

Adam Stevens commented on Google Spammy Structured Markup Manual Actions Spike Because Of WordPress Recipe Plugins

I think people using these recipe plugins aren't specifically using them for schema. They're using it for the layout, design, functionality and ease of use

Comment ID #2504218909 at 02/09/2016 08:38 am:

Ben Guest commented on Google Spammy Structured Markup Manual Actions Spike Because Of WordPress Recipe Plugins

Grace "The Queen of Rich Snippets" Langlois should receive the credit, Barry. Anyone can Google search to find the culprits...but only one does the thorough analysis to find resolution.