Scott Karp Wants To Know Why You Are Messing With Him

19 comments

It seems this thread is ranking for Scott Karp's name. He wants to know why SEOs and the google gods hate him.

http://publishing2.com/2007/02/26/a-challenge-to-the-well-intentioned-seo-industry/

I was going to title this post, “Why You Don’t Mess With The SEO Industry,” but I thought I would take a more open-handed approach. To all the well-meaning SEOs out there, can you explain how this SEO smack against me in one of your forums got to be the #2 Google result for my name?....
My gut tells me that this is in fact what happens to you when you mess with the SEO industry — which leaves me feeling a bit like I’m dealing with the mafia.

Comments

I can hear the shouting now,

I can hear the shouting now, "The SEO's are out to get me!!""

I think it's simply a status thing. TW has more of it than the other sites out there and in time, with some link building by the other sites, TW will slide.

>all of sudden this SEO

>all of sudden this SEO rag

Cold Scott, cold.

I think it shows, without question, that a little knowledge is a very dangerous thing.

Its all happened before

If you float your involved in SEO if you drown you work in marketing

it works like this. I don't

it works like this.
I don't agree with what you said scott so I don't link to you.
However I do happen to agree with TW so I link to them.
Google counts all these links (votes) and decides who ranks the highest.

which reminds me, I forgot to vote for the TW page ;)

Scott... my what a big

ego you have. I mean really, as if I care enough to want to rank TW for his name? (I haven't even updated my own blog - lol) It was bad enough that his ego couldn't accept that maybe the fact that his site did not rank well enough for "online publishing" had more to do with the Google Algo than the SEO Mafia he has conjured up in his mind. Now his ego has led him to believe that SEOs would care enough to want to rank for his name.

And where was the good intention Scott keeps writing that he would like from SEOs when he wrote that post? He doesn't seem to be full of good intentions in either post.

And yes, I'm a little ticked that Scott thought I wrote that on purpose. Wouldn't you be? Take it down a notch, Mr. Karp. No one cares that much.

Natasha...

remind me to never get on your bad side. ;)

Alittle too hard

Honestly I think we as a community are being alittle too hard on him..

Take it for what it's worth... but he did express a willingness to understand our industry more...

>Honestly I think we as a

>Honestly I think we as a community are being alittle too hard on him

I disagree.

It's not the fact he has an understanding of SEO and search in general not unadjacent to that of a small child.

It's not the fact that he claims to be an expert in online publishing.

It's the fact that he has no understanding of search whilst claiming to be an expert in online publishing that, rightly imo, raises the hackles somewhat.

Still a bit harsh...

Probably time to ease up a bit - get back to work you slackers:)

Scott did make a good attempt to understand - but the damage was done with the title. Aaron - it probably wouldn't hurt to edit them to "generic" titles (assuming no one is really out to get him), versus using Scott's name - no need to roast everyone that doesn't undersand seo, unless they persist with ignorance *cough* the head chef. Those that make legitimate attempts to understand the positive parts should certainly earn some sort of "pass" as well. Ranking for someone's name comes across pretty harsh, unless they are persistant with arguing stupid points. I think Scott conceeded, and has been a pretty good sport about the whole thing from what I've read.

More and more I'm starting to agree with the folks calling us out as a bunch of wankers;) A little humility (and a few minutes of cool down time before hitting "publish") would likely go a long way. The man has a point that things like this are why people have a negative stereotype of seo's (not that we generally care) - but no sense in adding fuel to a fire that someone else is trying to try to put out in a reasonable way. Even his original statements weren't baiting with the attack hook - they were legitimate questions from someone who was unfamiliar with what we do.

>expert in online publishing
Not one to normally disagree with you NFFC - I think he did his best to handle the situation in a professional manner, and did so in a pretty reasonable way. I think he is very adept at the publishing portion (content creation), though is certainly now learning more about the structuring of that content for optimal results. His interaction with the community was professional and handled well in my opinion, and should be treated with much more respect than those that piss gas on the fire and insist that they are correct. I respect someone who is able to admit when they were wrong, and learn from those who pointed out their faults without being overly defensive.

Please Note: Scott has decided to take his SEO questions private

from now on...

With all that said, I’m done with the SEO outsider blogging and provoking name bombing posts on Threadwatch. I hope you’ve learned something useful from my travails. I’m moving on to calling up some SEOs and seeing what they have to offer. If I have anything further to say on the topic of SEO, it will be from the inside

As the original poster - my

As the original poster - my intent wasn't to again rank for Scott's name, but to just notify readers of the ongoing conversation. I didn't figure a post title like "*He Who Is Not to Be Named* Wants to Know Why You Are Messing With Him" was a direct as using his name, but I'm cool with somthing along those lines too...

stuntdubl - As Scott would no doubt point out...

..every publication has its own character.

If you look at the SEO publications

WMW, SEW - take the high ground, equivalent of the broadsheets, TW takes a more tabloidesque style.

Would you want Threadwatch to change its character, because of one negative article?

> disagree with you NFFC

> disagree with you NFFC

Not allowed :)

I think the root of it all is that I can't separate online publishing for the masses from search. I honestly don't think that you can have one without at least a rudimentary understanding of the other, that could leave the impression that Mr Karp may have more hat than cattle.

But more than that I can't understand how somebody as in to online publishing as Mr Karp would fail to be gripped by search, would fail to drop everything, call in sick, say goodbye to the family and research, research, research and learn about search.

Online publishing for the masses is all well and good but writers, above all else, want to be read. If you're one of the masses that means you have to know search.

On the other hand it could all be an elaborate troll whose intent is to snag a free copy of Aaron's ebook, on that level I'm guessing it will be a success :)

NFFC and Natasha Robinson

The point I am trying to make is did we help validate or invalidate SEO's in general with this thread?

Not our skillset... just looking at the serps proved that.. hence why he was complaining... just in the overall view of SEO's in general?

Generally speaking, SEO's had to work with far less resources than other outlets in terms of marketing.. we had to work with nothing more in many cases than an 8 dollar domain name and 5 dollar a month hosting account... at least that is where I started. We worked on using aspects such as link bait, spent hours upon hours building content.. this is stuff that other areas of marketing would never touch... turning an 8 dollar a year domain name and 5 dollar a month hosting account into some type of vaild business that we support our familes on.

So when you are looking for perhaps the most cost effective marketing it would be SEO, again in my opinion...

So we are effective marketers... maybe that is why the rest of the ad agency types don't like us? maybe too effective for them? Maybe our ability to turn nothing into something .. with nothing... bugs them...

The end result is that this guy said we have an image problem... we might... and we have to prove to them (the overall marketing community, not just the SEO people) that we are a vaild marketing method..

The end result generally speaking again is trying to make our clients happy and return a postitive ROI... threads like this protray us as 1980's era hackers with an ax to grind. I know many of you people personally... and I know you are not like that... hence why I get dismayed at stuff like this.. I honestly feel we are above this.

Whew, good thing I call myself an Online Marketer

... SEOs must have it really rough if the opinion of one affects the entire industry.

But, I really do object to anyone saying I wrote that piece to rank for his name. Like any Threadwatch post, I wrote it to get the most reads. I think it would be absurd to say that from now on people no longer use anyone's name in a post title, or company in a blog title if they are not writing positively about them, simply because of how the Google Algo works.

Natasha

Trust me.. I am not saying that at all.. I am just venting outloud (via a keyboard)..

Putting someone's name as the title is fine... just overall I think scott had a vaild point.. we have been lampooned by the search engines initally.. even going as far as labeling a proper title tag as spam as late as 2003 by Yahoo. This of course trickled down the line to overall ad agencies in general saying that 'All SEO's are spammers'.

Looking at it from that perspective, I feel that we do have a reputation issue that should be resolved... who is going to do it for us?

I know you do good marketing, you sure know how to stir up Threadwatch :)

but you have to agree that we should focus more on our overall image... we should be viewed as what an Ad Agency will be in 10 years... not a bunch of spammers...

Reputation - What Reputation!

Quote:
Looking at it from that perspective, I feel that we do have a reputation issue that should be resolved... who is going to do it for us?

Yes, but which way should it be resolved :) - If you work only for yourself, the rest of the world not touching SEOs with a barge pole has to be an extremely positive outcome.

Kali

Quote:
the rest of the world not touching SEOs with a barge pole has to be an extremely positive outcome.

Great.. so fellow SEO'ers are out to get us as well?

You gotta see my point on this...

Scott Karp continues to be wrong about SEO

I could post over there but I'll do it here instead.

Seriously... if you go on about something and a whole community of people active in that specialty start discuss how wrong you are, you might stop. And least of all, if you decide to keep chatting about it anyway, avoid citing arrogance and egos amongst those specialists that are pointing out how wrong you are. It's likely to reflect badly on you.

If that blog is supposed to be "Scott Karp on the Convergence of Media and Technology" then Scott should probably lighten up, swallow the bitter pill that he needs to get up to speed on the impact of SEO on today's "Media and Technology", and maybe even make a few friends in the ThreadWatch community. I say this out of love -- Scott seems like a bright guy and we could use a few more of those in SEO world. I hope he studies hard and passes his qualifiers.

But, if Scott wants to continue to argue his misinformed positions on SEO, and whine about how that discussion is unfairly outranking him in the vanity SERPs, we really can't help him and need to move on, okay?

Note: I see we have two Scott Karp threads. The other is here http://www.threadwatch.org/node/12224

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.