<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: SEO Myths About SEO Myths</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.seo-theory.com/2008/10/21/seo-myths-about-seo-myths/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.seo-theory.com/2008/10/21/seo-myths-about-seo-myths/</link>
	<description>Algorithm analysis, Web community relationship analysis, SEO practices and techniques, industry news, etc.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 13 Mar 2010 13:54:56 -0500</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: don</title>
		<link>http://www.seo-theory.com/2008/10/21/seo-myths-about-seo-myths/comment-page-1/#comment-1250</link>
		<dc:creator>don</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 23 Oct 2008 21:11:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.seo-theory.com/wordpress/?p=799#comment-1250</guid>
		<description>I would not be surprised at all if Google crawls its top ranked pages more frequently, regardless of their content change frequency. My #1 pages are crawled very frequently, even though their content changes at relatively the same rate as all the other pages that don&#039;t hold such a high ranking.

If you looked at it from a QoS point of view, it would make perfect sense that Google would want to check up on them more often, rather than a page deep down in the rankings that barely is seen by any visitors. Top ranked pages directly reflect upon the quality of Google&#039;s search results, and I&#039;m sure they&#039;d want to be one of the first to know if a #1 site has been drastically altered by a hack, taking all those &#039;I&#039;m feeling lucky folks&#039; to a story of nightmare on search street. 

I doubt it helps rankings, but there could be a correlation between high rankings and frequent spidering.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I would not be surprised at all if Google crawls its top ranked pages more frequently, regardless of their content change frequency. My #1 pages are crawled very frequently, even though their content changes at relatively the same rate as all the other pages that don&#8217;t hold such a high ranking.</p>
<p>If you looked at it from a QoS point of view, it would make perfect sense that Google would want to check up on them more often, rather than a page deep down in the rankings that barely is seen by any visitors. Top ranked pages directly reflect upon the quality of Google&#8217;s search results, and I&#8217;m sure they&#8217;d want to be one of the first to know if a #1 site has been drastically altered by a hack, taking all those &#8216;I&#8217;m feeling lucky folks&#8217; to a story of nightmare on search street. </p>
<p>I doubt it helps rankings, but there could be a correlation between high rankings and frequent spidering.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: kinetic</title>
		<link>http://www.seo-theory.com/2008/10/21/seo-myths-about-seo-myths/comment-page-1/#comment-1249</link>
		<dc:creator>kinetic</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 22 Oct 2008 19:54:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.seo-theory.com/wordpress/?p=799#comment-1249</guid>
		<description>oh!nice!
Thank you very much</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>oh!nice!<br />
Thank you very much</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Michael Martinez</title>
		<link>http://www.seo-theory.com/2008/10/21/seo-myths-about-seo-myths/comment-page-1/#comment-1248</link>
		<dc:creator>Michael Martinez</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 22 Oct 2008 19:34:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.seo-theory.com/wordpress/?p=799#comment-1248</guid>
		<description>&lt;strong&gt;kinetic&lt;/strong&gt;: &quot; How you get out of there ? What i have to do to get in the main index ?&quot;

&lt;strong&gt;Michael&lt;/strong&gt;: Get more value-passing links to point to your site.

I&#039;ve posted some linking techniques on the &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.best-seo-blog.com/&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Best SEO Blog&lt;/a&gt; and I have some linking tips coming up on SEO Theory next week.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong>kinetic</strong>: &#8221; How you get out of there ? What i have to do to get in the main index ?&#8221;</p>
<p><strong>Michael</strong>: Get more value-passing links to point to your site.</p>
<p>I&#8217;ve posted some linking techniques on the <a href="http://www.best-seo-blog.com/" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">Best SEO Blog</a> and I have some linking tips coming up on SEO Theory next week.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: kinetic</title>
		<link>http://www.seo-theory.com/2008/10/21/seo-myths-about-seo-myths/comment-page-1/#comment-1247</link>
		<dc:creator>kinetic</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 22 Oct 2008 18:33:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.seo-theory.com/wordpress/?p=799#comment-1247</guid>
		<description>I may be a little bit off topic here but since you are talking about Supplemental Index in the myth number 2, i will jump on the occasion...my question will be very simple... after following your tips on how to know if a website is in the Supplemental index,  i&#039;ve found one of my site to be in there.. 

now the question is : How you get out of there ? What i have to do to get in the main index ?

thanks</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I may be a little bit off topic here but since you are talking about Supplemental Index in the myth number 2, i will jump on the occasion&#8230;my question will be very simple&#8230; after following your tips on how to know if a website is in the Supplemental index,  i&#8217;ve found one of my site to be in there.. </p>
<p>now the question is : How you get out of there ? What i have to do to get in the main index ?</p>
<p>thanks</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: paulpedersen</title>
		<link>http://www.seo-theory.com/2008/10/21/seo-myths-about-seo-myths/comment-page-1/#comment-1243</link>
		<dc:creator>paulpedersen</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 21 Oct 2008 21:33:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.seo-theory.com/wordpress/?p=799#comment-1243</guid>
		<description>@ehicks

I definitely agree with your statement ...and perhaps this is what has lead to the confusion around spider frequency equaling higher rankings.  Concepts are often misunderstood and connected with things they should not be.  

Growing up near the beach in Florida, I often heard people say not to hang out in three feet of water because that&#039;s where most shark attacks occur.  Well of course they do.  That where all the people are.  It really doesn&#039;t matter if I&#039;m in three or five feet of water.  I have just as much change of getting nibbled at.  I&#039;m thinking this SEO myth must have come from the same kind of misunderstanding.

In my experience, spider frequency is almost completely dependent on content update frequency. If you want the spiders to come more often, update your content more often.  But when they do come, it might effect your indexing.  It doesn&#039;t effect your ranking.  Pretty straight forward.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@ehicks</p>
<p>I definitely agree with your statement &#8230;and perhaps this is what has lead to the confusion around spider frequency equaling higher rankings.  Concepts are often misunderstood and connected with things they should not be.  </p>
<p>Growing up near the beach in Florida, I often heard people say not to hang out in three feet of water because that&#8217;s where most shark attacks occur.  Well of course they do.  That where all the people are.  It really doesn&#8217;t matter if I&#8217;m in three or five feet of water.  I have just as much change of getting nibbled at.  I&#8217;m thinking this SEO myth must have come from the same kind of misunderstanding.</p>
<p>In my experience, spider frequency is almost completely dependent on content update frequency. If you want the spiders to come more often, update your content more often.  But when they do come, it might effect your indexing.  It doesn&#8217;t effect your ranking.  Pretty straight forward.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ehicks</title>
		<link>http://www.seo-theory.com/2008/10/21/seo-myths-about-seo-myths/comment-page-1/#comment-1242</link>
		<dc:creator>ehicks</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 21 Oct 2008 18:26:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.seo-theory.com/wordpress/?p=799#comment-1242</guid>
		<description>@paulpedersen....  frequent spidering is not so much about rankings as it is about indexing your changes quicker.   If you have a page that is not spidered frequently, how long do you have to wait before Google picks up your most recent revisions and tweaks to your content?   I&#039;ve had to wait over a month on some sites.  My best sites are spidered daily, and any changes usually get indexed within a day or two.  It simply reduces the time cycle between making changes, monitoring results, making changes, and so on.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@paulpedersen&#8230;.  frequent spidering is not so much about rankings as it is about indexing your changes quicker.   If you have a page that is not spidered frequently, how long do you have to wait before Google picks up your most recent revisions and tweaks to your content?   I&#8217;ve had to wait over a month on some sites.  My best sites are spidered daily, and any changes usually get indexed within a day or two.  It simply reduces the time cycle between making changes, monitoring results, making changes, and so on.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: paulpedersen</title>
		<link>http://www.seo-theory.com/2008/10/21/seo-myths-about-seo-myths/comment-page-1/#comment-1241</link>
		<dc:creator>paulpedersen</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 21 Oct 2008 17:11:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.seo-theory.com/wordpress/?p=799#comment-1241</guid>
		<description>The whole “frequent spidering helps rankings” myth has always puzzled me.  Frequent spidering does not make you pages more relevant to specific search queries, so where this myth got it’s legs alludes me.

In regard to secret SEO tactics, I think the biggest secret is that we don’t see the forest through the trees.  The number one overlooked, and most valuable, aspect of SEO in my opinion is that we need to create answers (unique pages) that solve the searchers questions (search queries).  By doing that we organically create pages that are relevant to those search queries and are useful enough to get links without asking.  Do that, and you’ve hit the 80/20 rule of SEO.  All the remaining “SEO tactics” are gravy.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The whole “frequent spidering helps rankings” myth has always puzzled me.  Frequent spidering does not make you pages more relevant to specific search queries, so where this myth got it’s legs alludes me.</p>
<p>In regard to secret SEO tactics, I think the biggest secret is that we don’t see the forest through the trees.  The number one overlooked, and most valuable, aspect of SEO in my opinion is that we need to create answers (unique pages) that solve the searchers questions (search queries).  By doing that we organically create pages that are relevant to those search queries and are useful enough to get links without asking.  Do that, and you’ve hit the 80/20 rule of SEO.  All the remaining “SEO tactics” are gravy.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
