|
Posted on 10.19.07 by Widge @ 2:14 am
If you're reading this, then either the One Tusk Pantheon is back online or you got really fucking lucky. We're in the middle of some sort of shitstorm that I don't even understand. Here, join me in a tour of my misery: So we are now on a virtual private server on Dreamhost. Basically, for those who don't know–and you're happier not knowing, just trust me on this–I'll put this as simply as I can. Let's think about this like a train. Filed under: Ranting
|
|
Posted on 08.01.07 by Widge @ 2:12 am
Well, this is frustrating. For those who don't know (and probably don't care, if you're not a webmaster), there is a secondary set of search results you can get from Google. It's called Supplemental Results. It might as well be called "The Results That Aren't As Good As The Real Results." Nobody but nobody wants to be in them. A couple of months ago, I noticed that a goodly number of Needcoffee's entries had wound up in the Supplemental Results. At first, it appeared that this was because we had a lot of duplicate content: tag pages, category pages, date pages–all with the same posts. All right, fair enough–I setup a robots.txt that kept the Googlebot from indexing pages that I didn't want, and kept single entries as indexable. However, stuff continues to slide into Supplemental Results. Right now I was toying with internal links to try and get things under control, but basically Google has effectively blinded me to how well I'm doing. The name of the article should have been more properly called "Supplemental Goes Stealth." This doesn't fix anything. In fact, it makes my job as a webmaster even more difficult. It would be one thing if there was a webmaster tool that said, "Hey, Widge, here's what's wrong with your page and why it slid into Supplemental Hell." Then I would go and fix it. However, now I not only don't know why this is happening I can't even see it happening any longer. So the problem has just gotten a lot worse. Google's solution to the problem is simply to make it impossible to see the problem. But the problem hasn't gone away. This, frankly, sucks. And this is me, Google enthusiast and defender, talking here. Why is Google doing this? I run AdSense on Needcoffee. Why would they make it harder for people to find pages on my site and thus harder to get at the ad revenue that I could potentially bring in? And this is not just my site–AdSense is all over the place, and this affects everybody's sites. It would be in Google's best interests, I would think, to provide us with the tools so we can make our sites work better with their search engine, so everybody wins. Again, I'm not one of this whiny assholes who thinks Google owes me this–they owe me jack crap. It's just hard to understand why they would respond to a problem by, instead of using their vaunted resources to throw at it, to make it look like it's gone away and hope nobody bitches. Somebody help me understand how this is a good idea. Filed under: Fun With SEO
|
|
Posted on 05.08.07 by Widge @ 2:56 pm
So there I am, trolling through my blogs, behind as always, when I come across this line from SEO Black Hat: If you have verified the link and you are putting it on your site, do not put a nofollow on it. It's bad form. Well, this threw me for a loop. And that's not a coding joke. Back before I even started seriously screwing around with SEO, I ran across a few blog posts (and I won't even begin to fathom where they were) that seemed to know what they were talking about that explained the problem with bleeding PageRank. Basically, if you link out to a page, you give them a skoche of your PageRank. At the time, PageRank seemed like something you wanted to hang onto. And in my case, since I was trying to build a site properly, hang onto for dear life. The way to get out of this was to stick a rel="nofollow" on your outbound links. This would tell the search engines that mojo leakage was not in order, thank you very much. Okay, fine. Makes sense. But here's where we learn that SEO is a lot like medical science. I shall explain. One of my problems with doctors is that you get a lot of facts with your diagnosis but also a ton of opinion and interpretation. And also, they can't ever seem to agree on a lot of things. That's why red meat and caffeine are like Schrodinger's Diet–they exist in a "good for you/bad for you" state simultaneously, because nobody can make up their mind whether or not one or the other or both will kill you. Same thing with SEO. Because it's a bunch of folks peering in through frosted glass at the inner workings of the search engines, they're guessing. And at the time, it seems like a lot of people were making honest guesses about nofollow and what it meant and what you should do about it. But anyway, so this post at Black Hat really took the wind out of me, honestly. I've always considered myself a "black" hat SEO guy just because I only wear black, so I'm kind of one of them by default. But still–"bad form"? Fuck, the last thing I want to be accused of is bad form. I mean, if I'm going to be accused of being an asshole, I'd prefer it to be for something I meant to do. So I started combing around. Here's this from Scobleizer. Which led me to this from Search Engine Journal: Linking to someone with a NoFollow attribute is a sign of not trusting them. It's like reaching to shake someone's hand, but stopping to put on a pair of latex gloves. Now, excluding for a moment that I might wear latex gloves when shaking somebody's hand because in my old age I'm finding I'm about three steps away from becoming Monk, still…FUCK. Now they tell me. And upon reflection, since I am, after all, a Machiavellian bastard who wants to come out on top of everything (but at least I tell you this up front), I decided this makes sense. First of all, I don't want to look like an asshole unless I am an asshole. And I have plenty of other opportunities to be assholish that actually make sense. So. Second, I can't honestly tell you what PageRank does for me when it comes to Search Engine standings. I don't have the best PageRank in the world, and yet I seem to make out just fine. So. Fuck it. I just went and did an uber-find-and-replace and all the nofollow shit should be gone on Needcoffee. Effective immediately. If you find anything that is, let me know. I'll fix it on here soon enough…I've got other stuff broken on here since the move. Filed under: Fun With SEO
|
|
Posted on 03.23.07 by Widge @ 7:04 pm
Sound familiar? How about when I put it like this: 1. We must do something to prevent fraud in buying autos! 2. Taking your thumbprint is something! 3. It must be done! Filed under: Ranting
|
|
Posted on 01.12.07 by Widge @ 10:36 pm
It's seeing a post on Warren Ellis' site entitled "Testicular Juicing" and not clicking the link. Filed under: General BS
|
|
Posted on 06.02.06 by Widge @ 4:52 pm
I'm behind on blog-reading, but apparently people are shocked–shocked–that Steve Jobs thinks you should buy a new iPod every year. Here's the latest from Engadget, which is significantly less snarky than the last place I read it, but still. They seem to be treating this like it's proof that Jobs is evil or something. First of all, I hate to break this to anyone outraged by this notion, but for fuck's sake, where have you been? Companies want you to buy their shit. Not only that, but they want you to buy it and then buy it again. Why do you think things break and you have to replace them? Forget MP3 players. When was the last light bulb that honestly lasted as long as the package said it would? And wow, companies innovate so you want to buy the latest and greatest even if your present model is still working. This is really news. Fuck. How many times have you bought the same movie on DVD? Or if not you, somebody's buying them, so how many versions have you seen street? Forget DVDs, how many Monty Python CD compilations have you owned? Hell, I've got one called "The Final Ripoff," flaunting the fact that they had repackaged and resold stuff multiple times. And as for an iPod being obsolete the moment you open the package, again, where have you been? Bought a PC lately? Bought a TV lately? Hell, a car? It's called perspective. Rent some, if you can't afford to own. P.S. The battery life on my 4G iPod is fine and I use the hell out of it. And if you don't have enough sense to buy a case to keep your unit from getting scratched, then you're an idiot. If you own an iPod, you've already decided to trade the unit's functionality and ease of use for its lack of inherent self-protection. No need to trumpet to the world you didn't think about that before you bought it. Filed under: General BS
|
|
Posted on 05.21.06 by Widge @ 2:58 am
When you're wandering through a Wal-Mart looking for an item and you've just gone into the outside garden area because someone "saw them out there last time," that is exactly the wrong moment for a Muzak version of the "Twilight Zone" theme to start playing over the fucking PA system. How was your evening? Filed under: General BS
|
|
Posted on 03.28.06 by Widge @ 2:49 pm
I'm sure everyone's heard about the nude Britney Spears statue in which she's on a bear rug giving birth, right? I originally had no reaction to this, but now I've been struck by a disturbing thought: what happens, after the apocalypse, when our descendants have built a religion around this damn thing? "ALL HAIL THE BEAR FERTILITY GODDESS!" Puts that bayou scene in Call of Cthulhu to shame, doesn't it? Filed under: General BS
|

John Robinson is a writer of prose, poetry and comics who also writes under
the pseudonym of Widgett Walls.
This is my latest book. Short stories written especially for you, or at least someone who reminded me a lot of you at the time.