Almost Free Money - Anyone Can Participate

What you posted was rubbish. I know, you know it, and anyone with a clue knows it. You like to think you know a bit about it, but what you post indicates that you don't. Classic factors indeed LMAO!

Now stop fighting in Elanthius' shameless self-promotion thread.

Oh look!! It's a "LMOA!" Thar she blows!!! The great white Phil.
Only one though. Come along! You know you can do better than that.






So you are telling us that
- search engines see absolutely no difference in possible authoritativeness between a compact page and an extensive one
- search engines do not consider the existence of hyperlinks in a page to be significant
- search engines do not take account of IBLs
- search engines to not take account of the age of a page.

Correct. Btw, which page do you think is seen as the authoritive one - the compact one, or the extensive one? You gave no indication in either post. (Hint: you were closer in the first post. You went right off the boil in this one.)

Correct.

I've said before that IBLs are very important, but that wasn't one of the things that you posted. You've just added it for this post.

Correct. You posted this is a theory and not as a fact. A few years ago ageing was widely discussed as a possibility to account for something odd that suddenly started happening with the Google results (not the other engines). The reason for the oddity was never understood. Closer examination showed that the ageing idea didn't fit at all and another suggested took over from it that, by default, meant that a page had aged, but the reason for the oddity was never nailed down. To date, nobody has shown that ageing itself affects anything. The problem with widely discussed ideas like that is that they spread and take root even after they've been shown to be wrong. It happens all the time. Anyway, the GSA isn't Google and isn't written to perform in the same way.

From direct experience of having new websites up at the top of Google ranking for the business involved, and just days after it was launched, it is clear that a content-rich website gets ranked higher than a one-page brochure.



You're so keen to fire off the LMAO!'s and assert your authority be sheer repetition that you don't read posts, and if you do, you twist them into a meaning that suits you.

I specifically mentioned obvious sources of IBLs. You spout that it's rubbish.





Sure Phil. Nobody knows what the factor is. They just magically know what it isn't.


Hello?? I post something as a theory and zomg! Sling's posting stuff that hasn't been proved or disproved as *a theory*, and that means that she's posting rubbish? Get a grip!

Still, it makes a nice change from you banging on about me posting stuff as fact because I didn't precede it with IMO. Now I'm to be LMAO!ed at for explicitly posting that something is a theory.


Of course the GSA is a simplified version of Google. It's a black box appliance. Only you know how it works inside Phil. Good man!

Aaw... I've upset you - sorry (but you do bring it on yourself)

So you're saying that ageing doesn't come into it after all. I wish you'd make up your mind.

You see, Sling, all we have here in SL is the equivalent of a one-page brochure, and it's that that you were talking about in your first post when you talked about compact pages, extensive pages, and authorititive pages. So your content-rich website has nothing to do with this discussion. Please try to stop digressing. For the second time of asking, which page do you think is seen as the authoritive one - the compact one, or the extensive one? You said that one is better than the other, so which is it?

hmm... having looked again, you did mention something about it. It wasn't very clear or specific, but you did sort of mention it - I'll give you that.

If you're going to offer people information, it's best you just do it with things you know about. Otherwise you'll just confuse them by posting rubbish - as you did in the first post. And before you know it, we'll have rumours that people accept as facts etc. etc. With your lack of knowledge of how search works, it's best to stay out of it altogether. You just muddy the waters. Stick to things you know - alright?

Your arguments suck bigtime. They are childish squabbling standard.
This is because you are more interested in stupid point-scoring than you are in an honest debate.
If I say that one thing is important from direct experiences of creating websites, it does not logically mean that other factors are not relevant or have the same weight.



As for compact/extensive. It's all relative within the body being indexed.


"Sort of mention" - you are so full of shit.
You didn't recognise those as IBLs?
You just stopped reading as soon as you thought you had something to mould into a LMAO! - You sad man.

Christ on a bicycle, CUT IT OUT. Sling, Phil - get a room or get a grip.

But we're keeping Elan's thread up at the top

"Scumming" is an interesting choice of words, Elanthius.

You're not going to give them tips on how to rank higher? Wouldn't that ultimately help you?

Forgive me, but you did state that there's a theory about the age of a page making a difference. Then you said that you got a website to the top in Google just a few days after it was launched. With the best will in the world, the ageing theory went out the window with that website, so it does seem not only pointless in mentioning it, but even misleading.

So you don't have an answer as to whether it's better to have a compact page or a more extensive one? Not even since all we have in SL is a single page and not a "body being indexed". Or is the entire index the body? Can you see why what you posted is incredibly confusing, and doesn't actually tell us anything?

The only mention of IBLs was in this:- "A bunch of text and a lot of picks - other tabs filled out. Potentially interesting." and it doesn't actually mention IBLs - just the word "picks". It wasn't very clear to me on first reading - sorry.

I read it all, but yes, I'm a sad man. It makes me sad when people post things as facts but are completely unable to support the claimed facts. It makes me sad because they mislead people with it. In this case, you only mentioned one thing that is known to be true - "picks", and it was written in quite an obscure way. The rest of it was wrong and misleading.

Just because you post something doesn't mean it's right. And if you post something that someone knows is wrong, you can expect to be corrected. So be careful what you post.

Your reasoning is unbelievably faulty.

By your reasoning, if age has *any* influence then it follows that a new site can not get to the top of of Google ranking.
You argue that if my sites can get right up there out of the traps, then the theory about age having any influence must be completely bogus.


You're not attempting to discuss logically. You're just trying to stir up shit.
Ditto for the rest of your posts directed at me.

What can I say? You stated an old idea (that aged pages help) and then you stated that you got a site to the top within days of its launch, which, to say the least, is a very strong indication that no ageing came into play. I don't see anything faulty about that reasoning.

How is this progressing, Elan?

Yes. I was wondering that.
But maybe it's a bit to early to tell yet.

Maybe check back in a week or so?

Not too bad, so far there are 20 participants. You can see them all here: http://ninjaland.net/tools/search-scumming/

Technically speaking I haven't written the bot that will make the payments yet but it won't take long I have the records being collected and stored automatically and that's what really matters.

I think so far most people are not trying to get top they're just setting the text in their profile and leaving it. It's hard for me to really tell but no-one has beaten any of my rental managing alts in the rankings.

The main problem, as always, will be trying to advertise the project. Personally I find it hard to reach newbies. Hopefully as time goes by it will become more and more popular.

Perhaps the best part about it all is I haven't had a single question or query or request from anybody in IMs about it. Not wasting a ton of time on managing this is going to be critical if it will be worth doing.

I make it currently 18 people doing it. A couple must have changed their profiles.

You could try paying someone to distribute leaflets (notecards) at newbie places - help islands and infohubs, or whatever they are.

I just added my alt to it as an experiment. I think she should go straight to the top but we'll see. I don't know when the avatar pages are updated so it may be too late to make today's crawl, but the result should be seen after the search engine update tomorrow.

I'll remove her when I see where she ranks.

I did consider paying newbies to hand out leafelets as one of a number of ways to help newbies financially.
The problem is, you're into spamming / bloodlines sort of territory.

Maybe if it were obvious that they apeared like people on a street waving leaflets, and introdeced themselves in Chat, that would be OK.

There was some scheme in the past where people wore sandwich boards.









I can hardly wait the see Phils' alt ranking

I saw the same thin Desmond saw on the first page "please join grand experiment to see what affects profile search ranking"... and it was the right call.

You do all realise that at some point someone is going to raise a point about Alt Abuse to game search ranking??
If you didn't foresee that, you're asleep.


Sometime soon even


If an alt has a full social and business life in SL then it would not be surprising if she ranked high in search, and therefore might expect her Picks to be valuable IBLs. There are situations of course in which an alt has to be in a number of groups because of the function performed.
An alt that is simply a bot, a model or a tester might be not be expected to rank at all, never mind even show.

Exactly how would an active social and business life cause an alt to rank high in search?

Exactly how would an alt's high ranking cause its Picks to be valuable IBLs?

If your comment about groups meant that being in groups would help an alt to get a higher ranking, exactly how would that happen?

Ooooooh! Quelle surprise!!



The account would be doing the things that get a page in the first place. Things like payment info, group founding. An account created purely to be a traffic bot or model or tester would do none of that.
The Profile page of an active resident would have content including Picks.
The indexing has something to work with.
Anything that links to the page can be taken into account.


Page ranking. Not all pages are ranked equally.
For example:
I run a separate email alias for each domain and website that I admin. All of the sites get the usual automated spam requests for link exchange. The higher ranked sites get far more requests and get tailored requests from SEO operators. Links from such pages are more valuable than links from lower ranked pages.


I only mentioned groups in the context of what a profile of an avatar would look like if it were simply a limited function bot/model/whatever.


Ill leave it to you to explain all the other reasons for an alt to rank high.

None of that will help an avatar's page to rank higher, except the last sentence, but that wasn't mentioned in your previous post.


We know that not all pages are ranked equally, so I assume you meant PageRank rather than "Page ranking". The GSA does use a PageRank-like system which gives a score to each page. The score is taken into account as one of the ranking factors when compiling a set of results for a query. The effect is small, but it's there. However, the power of an avatar's pick links does not cause the avatar's page to rank higher - it helps the destination pages to rank higher. I think we were discussing getting an avatar's page higher, so the PageRank-like factor doesn't apply.

Ah! I see. Ignore supplementary information. Stick with the narrowest possible interpretation of the initial post.



Your question was

I answered that.
You're trying to make my answer misfit a different question.

Why don't you concentrate on giving useful information instead of trying to slap down others?

Except group founding which, as far as I know, is the only (or at least the most effective) way to increase your rank. The only other thing that has any effect on avatar profiles is keyword stuffing. I don't know why people think this is some big elaborate research project when everyone in the whole of SL knows exactly what affects rankings. Anyway, think what you like, as was mentioned already - there's no shame in paying people for research.

The sad part about it all is that my /real/ ulterior motive is to fill up the search with thousands of profiles that say "Rent Land from NinjaLand" when you search for "Rent Land" and apparently that never occurred to anyone. That's not really happening right now because most players are very low ranking. But maybe over time things will pick up.

Anyway, no-one gets nothing for nothing. If you wanna give jobs to newbies they're gonna have to be on this sort of scale where no skill of any kind is required.