MSN: http://search.msn.com/docs/siteowner...escription.htm

Did you read this page at all??? This page clearly says the meta description is for updating your sites' description in the serps. Just like I have been saying all along. Thank you for proving my point for me.


Google: http://code.google.com/webstats/2005-12/metadata.html
Once again you didn't check your source. This is part of a larger report showing the data as collected from their indexed content. They also showed common names for DIVs and other on page details. This page shows meta tags usage they have found on their websites. So not only did you take thi spage out of conttext (way out of context) but it says absolutely nothing about them using meta tags in their rankings. Thank you again for proving my point.


Yahoo: http://help.yahoo.com/help/us/ysearc...basics-18.html
This is their webmaster guideline page. This says they don't want spammy meta tags or, more specifically, spammy content. Once again, it doesn't say they use in their ranking algorithm.

You just clearly shown that you don't understand SEO at all. You took the fact that the search engines discuss meta tags in some capacity that is not about rankings and then made the huge leap that they use them in their algorithms.

Thank you for your post. You did my work for me.

I think you are looking for arguments for nothing. You keep altering your argument to suit your needs so as to not make your own self look rediculous and in doing so it isn't contributing to anything remotely professional looking.

But that is the point. The fact that the search engines even discuss it, some at length and with specific instructions to how to use them effectively, must mean they consider it to have value. To which extend is debatable as we may never know.

I run across people like you everyday. People obsessed with seeking SEO expert status. They want others to think like they may know all the little bits and pieces of the search engines thousands of algos and filters secrets. They have the exclusive meta tag angle covered. They are like the skinny dog who barks on the other side of the window. It is marketing. Appearing to be have some knowledge is a marketing illusion. Create. Argue until you are blue in the face all you want, but I am not wasting my breath with you anymore. Let each decide his own uses of meta tags. We have provided the SEO newbie both spectrums. You say that certain meta tags aren't an important factor in determining ranking, I disagree. Let each decide on their own and let's leave it that.

How can you come to that conclusion? That's based on poor logic. Just because they discuss them doesn't mean they use them. There is no correlation between the two. None.

1) I haven't called myself an SEO expert. But you sure do call yourself one.

2) I don't have SEO services advertised in my signature. You do.

So who are you describing?

When it comes to SEO there are little facts available that come directly from the search engines. As a result it is sup to each webmaster to try to discern fact from fiction based on a variety of sources and the reliability of those sources. Unfortunately, that takes time to do. As a result too many newbies go around making proclamations about SEO that are untrue and even ridiculous. I see it every day and it sucks. I can't stop people from making wild declarations or believing what they want to believe. But I can refute the garbage that is out there so those who are really interested in putting together a good understanding of SEO can do so and hopefully reap the rewards of their efforts.

You almost make sense now John.

Just catching up to you.

:lol: A good sense of humour. We could probably get along after all. Hang around you make for seriously sparked debate which is good for all of us.

Regards Fred

This is definitely the best debate around. That's for sure.