Posted by Jemdam.com on 12/04/22 11:28

> You have to, since the site you present has over 500 errors in its markup.
> <http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.pubtricks.com%2F> The
> page is a markup nightmare. There is no way to know how your page would
> perform with the major search engines, if it is build better and all
> content is accessible with ease.
>
>> I get about 30% of my traffic from search engine.
>
> That's like a miracle.

I write my HTML by hand and don't use all the tags. The tags in font and img
for example are optional and the markup test you have used thinks a lack of
an alt is an error which is total rubbish. The HTML coming out of
dreamweaver etc is so heavy, it is full of so much un-needed code.

>
> How about the plain 'magic' or 'magic trick'? Doesn't work, does it. I
> don't know about you, but if I wanted a cool magic trick, I would search
> for 'magic trick'. Not 'pub' or 'bar trick'.

Magic Tricks is too competitive, biggest factors for high google rate is the
title and domain name. I don't have magic in the domain and I don't think it
will be easy to get to the top for that.

>
>> Google just doesn't make that bigger impact.
>
> Somehow you just prooved my point. A site well built gets its traffic
> through search engines because they can spider and index the lot. A site
> not that well built (over five hundred errors in markup can qualify as
> such) has to resort to other systems to generate traffic.
>
>> I strongly feel there is no magic method of making traffic other than
>> hard
>> work (or may be RSS feeds but that is a whole other story).
>
> Oh, but creating accessible and usable sites _is_ hard work.

Tell me your site, I would love to see what you have done when you are so
critical of others.

>> I welcome other webmasters views, but only comment if you are a big (ish)
>> player, i.e. Alexa rating below 250000 as you just don't have enough
>> traffic
>> to know the effect of links vs google.
>
> :-D You shouldn't try to keep people out of a thread. As soon as _you_
> exclude (groups of) people, that is a sure reason for them to get and
> stay involved.

I guess that means you have a little site then ? :)

[Back to original message]