Would it be hypocritical of me to respond to a response when I said I was done? 
Close, but that's not quite what I'm saying. I only consider the site a single entity if it all deals with one subject, but that's not really the situation I'm considering.
What I was trying to describe is selecting from individual groups of meta keywords relevant to each of the categories. For example, categories 1 and 2 might each have 400 characters worth or keywords relative to their content, but only 250 could be selected from the standpoint of the search engine. Since there is no guarantee that the same selection and order of the keywords will always rank highest, why not randomize the process and if nothing else, average out your odds of doing well in any one listing. How often do you hear the complaint, "I'm listed first page on SE's A, B, and C, but nowhere in the top 2,000 on D?!"
Additionally, with Links listings, we are dealing with an essentially ever-changing page. Assuming you have a max # of links per page set, the content will change over time. So why not have an allowance for the same to happen with the keywords without having to do it manually?
Does that make a little more sense?
Again, let me say that I am as strongly opposed to garbage keyword listings and similar spam as anyone. I generally use indexes such as Yahoo instead of true search engines for this very reason.
Dan
[This message has been edited by Dan Kaplan (edited January 28, 2000).]
Quote:
I know what you are saying, you are looking at your site as a single entity, so that any hits on a page in your site will bring you traffic.What I was trying to describe is selecting from individual groups of meta keywords relevant to each of the categories. For example, categories 1 and 2 might each have 400 characters worth or keywords relative to their content, but only 250 could be selected from the standpoint of the search engine. Since there is no guarantee that the same selection and order of the keywords will always rank highest, why not randomize the process and if nothing else, average out your odds of doing well in any one listing. How often do you hear the complaint, "I'm listed first page on SE's A, B, and C, but nowhere in the top 2,000 on D?!"
Additionally, with Links listings, we are dealing with an essentially ever-changing page. Assuming you have a max # of links per page set, the content will change over time. So why not have an allowance for the same to happen with the keywords without having to do it manually?
Does that make a little more sense?
Again, let me say that I am as strongly opposed to garbage keyword listings and similar spam as anyone. I generally use indexes such as Yahoo instead of true search engines for this very reason.
Dan
[This message has been edited by Dan Kaplan (edited January 28, 2000).]
