Google recently changed it’s “What’s An SEO” page, they blogged about it on the official blog June 30. On July 1, Googler John Mu posted this in GoogleGroups,
Suppose a webmaster were to come to you and ask for advice on finding someone who can help optimize his site for search engines. How would you recommend that they get started? Where should they look for SEOs? Which questions should they ask? How could they recognize competent (or incompetent) SEOs?
Bold mine.
The last line caused my eyebrows to go up a bit. “Incompetent” as opposed to unethical, that surprised me. Dictionary.com defines “incompetent” as “not competent; lacking qualification or ability; incapable”. Interesting, although I guess you could make a long-winded case the two are interrelated.
None of the people responding to John Mu’s post focused on “incompetent” SEO’s – but just about everyone used the word “snakeoil” in their comments. Again – interesting.
Anyone else wonder why a company who names spam control tools after certain members of the SEO community solicits feedback on incompetent SEO’s?
Enough about Google, I want to end the week on a positive note.
Wiep sent me new baby pictures of his son Liam – here’s my fav. Enjoy his bright face and the weekend.
I really wish you posted more often. I find your blog to be one of the lesser known gems out there in the SEO blogging community.
Lol I know I suck at giving compliments.
Gee Halfdeck, what would the seo industry do without you?
Jill will be gratified (deservedly) to know Google is using her playbook as a guide.
Debra, John’s reference to “competence” I’m guessing is straight out of Jill Whalen’s playbook, in which she discourages people from categorizing SEOs using hat colors, instead emphasizing competence as a perfered way of judging SEOs and SEO tactics.
I think the funniest thing on the planet is getting spam email from SEO folks. If I want the very best SEO, I’ll google it…wouldn’t that be the best way?