<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Google SearchWiki: Toy or Trash?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.googletutor.com/2008/11/24/searchwiki-toy-or-trash/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.googletutor.com/2008/11/24/searchwiki-toy-or-trash/</link>
	<description>Your how-to guide for Google with Google tutorials, tips for using Google and advice.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 20 Nov 2009 21:25:51 -0600</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Matt Inertia</title>
		<link>http://www.googletutor.com/2008/11/24/searchwiki-toy-or-trash/#comment-241799</link>
		<dc:creator>Matt Inertia</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 26 Nov 2008 15:04:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.googletutor.com/?p=2264#comment-241799</guid>
		<description>As an account only service I think there is nothing wrong with what they&#039;re doing and I&#039;m sure some people will find it very useful. Ill stick with my delicious account though!

Its the public section that I&#039;ve got the beef with. The opportunity for flaming is obvious and also the opportunity to manipulate the &quot;SearchWiki rankings&quot; is also a problem.

For example, google SEO, look at the SearchWiki results and you&#039;ll see Seobook number one (maybe they deserve to be but that&#039;s not the point). They have 54 &quot;ups&quot; and until someone gets more &quot;ups&quot; than them they will always be number one for that SearchWiki... That may not be a number one in the organic rankings but for a sector like SEO, where anyone looking for an SEO or SEO services is likely to look at the SearchWiki results the advantage of having the most &quot;ups&quot; is obvious -- and one that&#039;s very easy to manipulate.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>As an account only service I think there is nothing wrong with what they&#8217;re doing and I&#8217;m sure some people will find it very useful. Ill stick with my delicious account though!</p>
<p>Its the public section that I&#8217;ve got the beef with. The opportunity for flaming is obvious and also the opportunity to manipulate the &#8220;SearchWiki rankings&#8221; is also a problem.</p>
<p>For example, google SEO, look at the SearchWiki results and you&#8217;ll see Seobook number one (maybe they deserve to be but that&#8217;s not the point). They have 54 &#8220;ups&#8221; and until someone gets more &#8220;ups&#8221; than them they will always be number one for that SearchWiki&#8230; That may not be a number one in the organic rankings but for a sector like SEO, where anyone looking for an SEO or SEO services is likely to look at the SearchWiki results the advantage of having the most &#8220;ups&#8221; is obvious &#8212; and one that&#8217;s very easy to manipulate.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
