Member Sites  ::  JOIN  ::  Forum  ::  Info  ::  Next Ring  
WebRing Managers Community - Untitled document One of the original and largest Ring Manager rings, promoting individual WebRings since 1998

  Forums     Login   Signup



WebRing Managers Community

Manager: wrug
WebRing Managers WebRing presents the WebRing Managers Forum, a place for WebRing Managers to discuss ideas, ethics, tactics, etc. This Forum is for WebRing discussion only and is closely moderated.
 

Sponsored Links

PLEASE READ BELOW BEFORE PARTICIPATING
A Note on Pendings
  For those processing new submissions we'd like to offer these reminders/bit
read...

Forum Posts - Start a new discussion! Posts 1 - 7 of 7
All Threads |   All Posts   ]

Suggestions - 01/20/2008
You say potato we say potato. We ARE sorry the system doesn't live up to everyone's standards. The big picture, which you insist on missing by focusing on specifics, is what we attempt to keep our sites on. Once again. changes are made through planning and execution. Scurrying from detail to detail results in wasted time and mistakes. We know this to be true from experience.




Replied - 01/21/2008
Sigh. I'm not protesting the order in which you choose to make changes or not make changes; I wasn't even discussing the "big picture" or the "specific details." What I was addressing was the rudeness with which you greeted quotes when he made valid suggestions. It was, of course, gracious of you to admit in the end that the blog feature needs work and that you'll get to it in due time.




Replied - 01/21/2008
Ahh that's right...This one you mean?

"It is the first ring you join that reduces your ranking."

which was a nice, helpful, suggestion nicely phrased to divert attention from a really quite good disussion on how many rings to join, whether to use a landing page, etc.

It was only after begin called on the carpet for that comment that he rallied with concrete suggestions. Far better, in our opinion, would be a discussion of what kinds of links can help or hurt rankings, not a blanket accusation, even followed with how some improvements to webring compliance with standards might improve page rankings for members, etc (not to mention compliance on members parts helping webring and the community).

It's the divisiveness that is unnecessary.




Replied - 01/21/2008
"It is the first ring you join that reduces your ranking."


That is still true.

It has to do with the simple (yet complex) fact that the text to code ratio of web pages is currently considered an important factor in the ranking of web pages.

It is not as important as it was five years ago but it is still in the top 30 most important factors.

By adding code to a page, you reduce the text to code ratio.

That has an impact on your ranking.

When you join the second ring, the third ring, and so forth, you don't add any more code to the page so that has no negative impact on the text to code ratio and therefore has no additional negative impact.

It may, in fact, have a positive impact, as the listing in additional rings can impact the TrustRank and authority of the page in a positive way.




Replied - 01/22/2008
Have to politely disagree. The generalization you have made, at least implicitly, is that ALWAYS when you join a first ring, and by direct correlary add any other link, you NECESSARILY harm your page rank.

It's the absolutes the world can do without. We do not disagree that SOME links CAN impact ranking (which fluctuates FAR more often than every 5 years - anything more than 12 months old is probably diminished in authority; more specifically anything prior to 10/25/2007) negatively. Some can also impact positively. Some may have little impact depending on the status of your site to begin with. So where does that leave one?

Back to the original, and far more practical, discussion of how many rings one should join and where to place the code. The answer should be pretty clear. Be selective. The quality of the sites in the rings you belong to may well impact the perceived quality of your site. It's not the first, or the number, it's the quality. And you have a diret ability to manage that quality - as does eeryone else in (most) communities you choose to join. You can take part in reviewing/suspending/accepting sites in the communities you belong to. So can others. So if you don't want to be assocaited with rubbish sites, or sites where the code is hidden or shoved off where it does no one any good, TAKE ACTION. But, the reverse may be true. IF you utilize the same tactics others may think the same way. And should.




Replied - 01/22/2008
Disagreeing with facts and then twisting the words to make them sound like they are not facts does not make it so.

First of all - don't use the term page rank - That is a trademarked term for the result of a specific calculation by a specific search engine.

That is not what I am talking about.

What am saying is this:

The addition of code to a page without a corresponding increase in text at the same time will reduce the text to code ratio.

This addition of code will also increase the total page size.

It may also impact load time for the page.

The text to code ratio, the total page size, and the load time for the page are three of over 100 factors taken into account in some way by Google and perhaps by the other search engines in determining where to place your pages in the search results for a specific query.

PS: The reference to "about 5 years ago" is related to the four month period "about 5 years ago" when total page size was the absolute, top, number one, most important factor in the Google ranking algo.

It has not been nearly as important since then but it is still an important factor.

It is not a bad thing ... it is an imformational thing.

For all you webmasters out there ...

When you add the first ring to your page and add the ring code, try to remove some un-needed "stuff" from that page and try to add some additional text related to the target keywords for that page.

Remove white space.

Remove a widget, or buttons, or ads, or chicklets that are not producing results.

Remove some links or some excessive navigation elements that your statistics say are not producing the kind of activity you want.

Add a bit more descriptive text with more information about the page topic.

... and so forth.

The result of that small bit of effort should result in a large positive impact on your search results.




Replied - 01/22/2008
Page Rank, ranking, three words. You continue to divert from a valid discussion. We have not distorted anything at all. Simply addressed the voersealous use of generalizations. There's some good advice at the bottom, but it has nothing to do with the dicusion about links or rings, it's filler. It has to do with site design. Another great topic, but not this one.

"That is not what I am talking about.

What am saying is this:

The addition of code to a page without a corresponding increase in text at the same time will reduce the text to code ratio. "

And we are saying that that is tantamount to searching for witches. Stop trying to throw down tea leaves and pretend that you can see into the mystic. Text/code ratio is an algortihmic measure, nothing more. As such it's value is questionable, as are most algorithmic measures - as evidenced by the fact that the almighty page rank (er ranking, err google quants) keep changing their precious algorithms. The're inherently inferior to human evaluation - but a darn site faster. If one search engine gives it credibility another will not. It has very little to do with quality of your site (avoiding the word nothing). As for text/code ration you'll find plenty of sites built with msft front page, which seems to strive for a t/c ration as close to zero as possible, with excellent rankings/search positions/traffic. Why? Because the PEOPLE viewing the site like it. The same can be said for crude old 1.0 sites with no adherance to current stylistic norms or standards. Again, PEOPLE like them.

What WE are saying is that you should link to sites that are worth linking to. Don't give a damn what random people or google or anyone else says. Follow the "leaders" like sheep and you end up at the slaughter.

Create your site the way YOU would want to see a site. Link to sites YOU would like to visit and who's visitors YOU would like to visit your site. Don't go hunting for the next "holy grail" , you'll spend more time reacting and less time being creative. Be creative, not one of the pack.



All Threads |   All Posts   ]





Contact Us | Copyright © 2001-2016 WebRing®, Inc. Terms of Service - Help - Privacy Policy