Email marketing is annoying and potential customers are not impressed with receiving solicitations in their inboxes (should your communication be able to pass their spam filters, which incidentally and perhaps ironically are in place to stop email marketers from reaching their inboxes). In other words, it isn't often an effective digital marketing strategy.
The Chinese government is just as interested in Tibet's oil as the US oil industry. The only difference is that corporations likes Chevron and Exxon want ALL the world's oil reserves in the same way that mineral extraction corporations want ALL of the diamonds, silenium, gold, copper, zinc ... In looking back over recent history (last 50 years), the US backed multi-national corporations will stop at nothing despite the human cost to secure future profits for their shareholders. I think that is the point I'm trying to make. Ironically, ridding the world of the bad guys with their 1% attitude rooted in the name of God, then for the good of the country amd always for the betterment of civilized society of course.
Just thought that I'd inject another thought in this ... I would think increasing the quantity of new original postings and new original follow-up discussions does not have as much of a positive effect as eliminating redundant postings by morphing them together. This would be helpful for visitors whenever a forum has three or four recently similarily worded postings/responses. These half-ass pages actually dilute each other's importance. I would think it way better to have one really well optimized and condensed posting of three almost identical topics rather than three poorly written and poorly optimized mediocrities to offer the visitor and the spider.
As it appears to me that the multi-national corporations wanted to pillage the Orient are positioning themselves with US policy backing them, I suppose the next target for US foreign policy is to incite enough turmoil in Tibet (perhaps similar to how they played a role in Egypt) so as to piss off the Chinese government enough to retaliate "against Tibetans" in order to restore the tranquility Tibetans are incidentally presently enjoying.
It's hard to imagine how such a simple Internet task could have evolved into one of the biggest social tragedies of our day.
Ever since Google smashed the world with this PageRank nonsense, it seems the object of the growing Internet marketing world is to link, and incessantly they do. It's to the point of lunacy now. The link building frenzy has gone completely nuts. It's way out-of-hand and may never be reeled back in. The money's flying everywhere and there's no body controlling it.
My neighbours use search engines ads (poorly most the time). They have 0% knowledge where there advertising dollar is REALLY going. Not a clue and not a care. This apathetic attitude is prevalent throughout society. Nobody seems to care. As long as the rankings are in place and the telephone is ringing once in a while it all seems like a good bang for the buck. But it isn't. It isn't even close. In my opinion it is advertising dollars that are very poorly spent. Not a wise investment.
The search engines have become corporate and their only goal now is to exploit the hyperlink in order to maximize profit for its shareholders. Search engine advertising dollars down the drain into the pockets of both corporations and the best international link manipulators; who work together to encourage exploiting the once useful hyperlink.
Link building is unregulated and the search engine likes it that way. There are no rules determining what constitutes ethical use of of ...
[QUOTE=almostbob;1014284]follow the instructions ...[/QUOTE]Instructions? What instructions? The only thing that Google talks about is PageRank and how it can be helpful to manipulate it.
[QUOTE=almostbob;1014284]follow the instructions ...
Pretty much nothing anyone else says about google really matters much[/QUOTE]Really? Well I don't see any mention of how to optimze web page components or images or logical naming or the value of a powerful internal linking structure or ... These things are unimportant?