<?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: Leaked Document: Google&#8217;s 2007 Site Ranking Guidelines for its Quality-Raters</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.thelazymarketer.com/blog/2008/04/14/leaked-document-googles-2007-site-ranking-guidelines-for-its-quality-raters/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.thelazymarketer.com/blog/2008/04/14/leaked-document-googles-2007-site-ranking-guidelines-for-its-quality-raters/</link>
	<description>Super-Affiliates Work Smarter - Not Necessarily Harder...</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 03 Sep 2010 01:08:40 -0400</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: googleleak maps</title>
		<link>http://www.thelazymarketer.com/blog/2008/04/14/leaked-document-googles-2007-site-ranking-guidelines-for-its-quality-raters/#comment-825</link>
		<dc:creator>googleleak maps</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 05 Jul 2008 11:43:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thelazymarketer.com/blog/2008/04/14/leaked-document-googles-2007-site-ranking-guidelines-for-its-quality-raters/#comment-825</guid>
		<description>[...] that???s why they???re the favored engines of ... TheLazyMarketer.com/GoogleLeak/. Enjoy :-) ...http://www.thelazymarketer.com/blog/2008/04/14/leaked-document-googles-2007-site-ranking-guidelines-...Google accidentally leaks Google Reader orientation video &#124; Googling ...Garett Rogers explores the [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] that???s why they???re the favored engines of &#8230; TheLazyMarketer.com/GoogleLeak/. Enjoy <img src='http://www.thelazymarketer.com/blog/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':-)' class='wp-smiley' />  &#8230;http://www.thelazymarketer.com/blog/2008/04/14/leaked-document-googles-2007-site-ranking-guidelines-&#8230;Google accidentally leaks Google Reader orientation video | Googling &#8230;Garett Rogers explores the [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: admin</title>
		<link>http://www.thelazymarketer.com/blog/2008/04/14/leaked-document-googles-2007-site-ranking-guidelines-for-its-quality-raters/#comment-631</link>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 09 Jun 2008 00:36:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thelazymarketer.com/blog/2008/04/14/leaked-document-googles-2007-site-ranking-guidelines-for-its-quality-raters/#comment-631</guid>
		<description>Hi Jeff,

No, your article won&#039;t get penalized.

What happens is that only a few of the major sites (usually EzineArticles.com) will actually have enough authority to become the &quot;ambassador&quot; for your article in the SERPS.

The other sites might only show up for supplemental results, etc.

Also, remember that with the lesser engines (like MSN), they still seem to be hugely influenced by the influx of one-way links from these sites, reprinted content or not.

I would generally agree that submitting unique articles to individual sites is the better way to go for long-term results, but it might not be as efficient.

What I do is a mix of mass-submissions along with individual requests to niche sites. It&#039;s actually surprisingly easy to get one-way links just by asking, so long as your site has something worth linking to.

Now, in regards to USING reprint content, there is no penalty. The only &quot;risk&quot; you take is that the time spent publishing/using reprintable content might not equate to much traffic.

But it WILL equate to some, to be sure.

One thing you DO want to avoid though is &quot;duplicate content&quot; on your own domain. Each page should contain largely unique content as it relates to your other pages.

THAT&#039;s what Google is talking about in regards to duplicate content.

Think about it - sites like Reuters, PRWeb.com, several news sites, Answers.com and a whole slew of other aggregators would go out of business overnight if &quot;duplicate&quot; content was being penalized.

Take care,

-Chris</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Jeff,</p>
<p>No, your article won&#8217;t get penalized.</p>
<p>What happens is that only a few of the major sites (usually EzineArticles.com) will actually have enough authority to become the &#8220;ambassador&#8221; for your article in the SERPS.</p>
<p>The other sites might only show up for supplemental results, etc.</p>
<p>Also, remember that with the lesser engines (like MSN), they still seem to be hugely influenced by the influx of one-way links from these sites, reprinted content or not.</p>
<p>I would generally agree that submitting unique articles to individual sites is the better way to go for long-term results, but it might not be as efficient.</p>
<p>What I do is a mix of mass-submissions along with individual requests to niche sites. It&#8217;s actually surprisingly easy to get one-way links just by asking, so long as your site has something worth linking to.</p>
<p>Now, in regards to USING reprint content, there is no penalty. The only &#8220;risk&#8221; you take is that the time spent publishing/using reprintable content might not equate to much traffic.</p>
<p>But it WILL equate to some, to be sure.</p>
<p>One thing you DO want to avoid though is &#8220;duplicate content&#8221; on your own domain. Each page should contain largely unique content as it relates to your other pages.</p>
<p>THAT&#8217;s what Google is talking about in regards to duplicate content.</p>
<p>Think about it &#8211; sites like Reuters, PRWeb.com, several news sites, Answers.com and a whole slew of other aggregators would go out of business overnight if &#8220;duplicate&#8221; content was being penalized.</p>
<p>Take care,</p>
<p>-Chris</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jeff</title>
		<link>http://www.thelazymarketer.com/blog/2008/04/14/leaked-document-googles-2007-site-ranking-guidelines-for-its-quality-raters/#comment-625</link>
		<dc:creator>Jeff</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 04 Jun 2008 10:47:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thelazymarketer.com/blog/2008/04/14/leaked-document-googles-2007-site-ranking-guidelines-for-its-quality-raters/#comment-625</guid>
		<description>Chris, can you please once and for all end the debate on duplicate content?  You say in your book that the theory is crap, though most harp on it.  

My main concern is, if I write an article, and cut and paste it in a bunch of directories, will I get penalized?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Chris, can you please once and for all end the debate on duplicate content?  You say in your book that the theory is crap, though most harp on it.  </p>
<p>My main concern is, if I write an article, and cut and paste it in a bunch of directories, will I get penalized?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bibokz</title>
		<link>http://www.thelazymarketer.com/blog/2008/04/14/leaked-document-googles-2007-site-ranking-guidelines-for-its-quality-raters/#comment-622</link>
		<dc:creator>Bibokz</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 22 May 2008 05:18:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thelazymarketer.com/blog/2008/04/14/leaked-document-googles-2007-site-ranking-guidelines-for-its-quality-raters/#comment-622</guid>
		<description>Google SPAM, still unsure if this issue is real or just another bait.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Google SPAM, still unsure if this issue is real or just another bait.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Neo</title>
		<link>http://www.thelazymarketer.com/blog/2008/04/14/leaked-document-googles-2007-site-ranking-guidelines-for-its-quality-raters/#comment-612</link>
		<dc:creator>Neo</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 10 May 2008 02:52:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thelazymarketer.com/blog/2008/04/14/leaked-document-googles-2007-site-ranking-guidelines-for-its-quality-raters/#comment-612</guid>
		<description>&quot;That either means there’s no demand for your topic, or you’re targeting stuff that’s too competitive and getting buried.&quot;
---------------------------

Chris,
Thanks for the reply. I think my site falls in second category. That is too much competition. 
But I have tried to optimize my site for the &quot;money keywords&quot;, so that even if the traffic is low, it should bring me some sales. And as a result I made my first sale from that during this week.
(If you would like to take a look at my site, it is at: http://www.dietcontrolpills.com )

I still need to work more on the sales text on my site. But my initial aim is to bring more search engine traffic. 

Anyway, thanks for all your valuable suggestions.
Regards,
Neo</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;That either means there’s no demand for your topic, or you’re targeting stuff that’s too competitive and getting buried.&#8221;<br />
&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;</p>
<p>Chris,<br />
Thanks for the reply. I think my site falls in second category. That is too much competition.<br />
But I have tried to optimize my site for the &#8220;money keywords&#8221;, so that even if the traffic is low, it should bring me some sales. And as a result I made my first sale from that during this week.<br />
(If you would like to take a look at my site, it is at: <a href="http://www.dietcontrolpills.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.dietcontrolpills.com</a> )</p>
<p>I still need to work more on the sales text on my site. But my initial aim is to bring more search engine traffic. </p>
<p>Anyway, thanks for all your valuable suggestions.<br />
Regards,<br />
Neo</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: admin</title>
		<link>http://www.thelazymarketer.com/blog/2008/04/14/leaked-document-googles-2007-site-ranking-guidelines-for-its-quality-raters/#comment-605</link>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 08 May 2008 09:32:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thelazymarketer.com/blog/2008/04/14/leaked-document-googles-2007-site-ranking-guidelines-for-its-quality-raters/#comment-605</guid>
		<description>&quot;Google indexed most of the pages of my site very quickly. But no traffic even after couple of months.&quot;

----------------------

That either means there&#039;s no demand for your topic, or you&#039;re targeting stuff that&#039;s too competitive and getting buried.

Either way, though, indexed content should at least be getting &quot;some&quot; traffic by way of long-tail search terms.

Remember that as your primary-target rankings climb - it usually runs across the board. Meaning that you&#039;ll rank more highly for hundreds or perhaps thousands of keywords.

Cheers,

-Chris</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Google indexed most of the pages of my site very quickly. But no traffic even after couple of months.&#8221;</p>
<p>&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;-</p>
<p>That either means there&#8217;s no demand for your topic, or you&#8217;re targeting stuff that&#8217;s too competitive and getting buried.</p>
<p>Either way, though, indexed content should at least be getting &#8220;some&#8221; traffic by way of long-tail search terms.</p>
<p>Remember that as your primary-target rankings climb &#8211; it usually runs across the board. Meaning that you&#8217;ll rank more highly for hundreds or perhaps thousands of keywords.</p>
<p>Cheers,</p>
<p>-Chris</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: cheetu</title>
		<link>http://www.thelazymarketer.com/blog/2008/04/14/leaked-document-googles-2007-site-ranking-guidelines-for-its-quality-raters/#comment-591</link>
		<dc:creator>cheetu</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Apr 2008 11:26:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thelazymarketer.com/blog/2008/04/14/leaked-document-googles-2007-site-ranking-guidelines-for-its-quality-raters/#comment-591</guid>
		<description>For my first site I used ken evoy&#039;s suggestions in SBI. Its a great system, it takes time but to create authority sites its good. I am ranked for my target keywords form last 7 months non stop.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>For my first site I used ken evoy&#8217;s suggestions in SBI. Its a great system, it takes time but to create authority sites its good. I am ranked for my target keywords form last 7 months non stop.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Neo</title>
		<link>http://www.thelazymarketer.com/blog/2008/04/14/leaked-document-googles-2007-site-ranking-guidelines-for-its-quality-raters/#comment-580</link>
		<dc:creator>Neo</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 20 Apr 2008 07:04:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thelazymarketer.com/blog/2008/04/14/leaked-document-googles-2007-site-ranking-guidelines-for-its-quality-raters/#comment-580</guid>
		<description>Jeremy,
I tried that. But it doesn&#039;t work always.

After buying Chris&#039;s ebook, I started a site on a one year old domain. I bought several links and some directory submissions. Google indexed  most of the pages of my site very quickly. But no traffic even after couple of months. I have no outgoing links on the site except to the affiliate sponsor. And all those links carry nofollow tags.

Anyway I will try TK for a month or two and see the results. Or may be I chose the wrong niche. :(</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Jeremy,<br />
I tried that. But it doesn&#8217;t work always.</p>
<p>After buying Chris&#8217;s ebook, I started a site on a one year old domain. I bought several links and some directory submissions. Google indexed  most of the pages of my site very quickly. But no traffic even after couple of months. I have no outgoing links on the site except to the affiliate sponsor. And all those links carry nofollow tags.</p>
<p>Anyway I will try TK for a month or two and see the results. Or may be I chose the wrong niche. <img src='http://www.thelazymarketer.com/blog/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_sad.gif' alt=':(' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jeremy Hier</title>
		<link>http://www.thelazymarketer.com/blog/2008/04/14/leaked-document-googles-2007-site-ranking-guidelines-for-its-quality-raters/#comment-579</link>
		<dc:creator>Jeremy Hier</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 20 Apr 2008 00:25:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thelazymarketer.com/blog/2008/04/14/leaked-document-googles-2007-site-ranking-guidelines-for-its-quality-raters/#comment-579</guid>
		<description>You can rank higher with less inbounds by theming your website, linking pages to only related pages,
and using the &quot;nofollow&quot; to stop theme bleeding.

Another term for this is siloing your website.
This works.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You can rank higher with less inbounds by theming your website, linking pages to only related pages,<br />
and using the &#8220;nofollow&#8221; to stop theme bleeding.</p>
<p>Another term for this is siloing your website.<br />
This works.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: admin</title>
		<link>http://www.thelazymarketer.com/blog/2008/04/14/leaked-document-googles-2007-site-ranking-guidelines-for-its-quality-raters/#comment-577</link>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 19 Apr 2008 18:36:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thelazymarketer.com/blog/2008/04/14/leaked-document-googles-2007-site-ranking-guidelines-for-its-quality-raters/#comment-577</guid>
		<description>Neo,

Spun content just isn&#039;t unique.

That&#039;s the issue.

Try it out by all means, but I would be concerned about the long-term value of the service.

-Chris</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Neo,</p>
<p>Spun content just isn&#8217;t unique.</p>
<p>That&#8217;s the issue.</p>
<p>Try it out by all means, but I would be concerned about the long-term value of the service.</p>
<p>-Chris</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
